May 24, 2022 -- Deadly shooting at Texas elementary school

[Crazy Cat 41,806]

6 hours ago, LIBrty4all said:

As @Mike E has said, diagnosing mental illness is a tough thing.

That is 100% correct.  I have experience in both Adolescent and Adult Psych as a health care professional.  That area of medicine is extremely subjective and a great deal of guess work.   I would even say it is primitive.  Meds are not always effective, and many cause adverse side effects.  We have a long, long way to go to reform this area of medicine.  Hind sight is always 20-20. 

[Mike E 11,739]

Why is it FB, Instagram, and Twitter can immediately, and automatically ferret out, delete, ban,  and cancel anyone who suggests Covid was deliberately  created in a lab, ivermectin works, the laptop was owned by Hunter, the 2020 election was rigged, women who don’t menstruate aren’t women, Ilhan married her brother, global warming is a hoax, etc but it can’t seems to detect and delete nut jobs who post their plans to mass murder?

 

Seriously. What is up with that? Social media’s priorities for censorship are bizarre and criminal .
 

 I hope libs enjoy their safe little spaces.  

Edited May 27, 2022 by Mike E

[Crazy Cat 41,806]

6 minutes ago, Mike E said:

Why is it FB, Instagram, and Twitter can immediately, and automatically ferret out, delete, ban,  and cancel anyone who suggests Covid was deliberately  created in a lab, ivermectin works, the laptop was owned by Hunter, the 2020 election was rigged, women who don’t menstruate aren’t women, Ilhan married her brother, global warming is a hoax, etc but it can’t seems to detect and delete nut jobs who post their plans to mass murder?

 

Seriously. What is up with that? Social media’s priorities for censorship are bizarre and criminal .
 

 I hope libs enjoy their safe little spaces.  

Like most of that faction, they are hypocrites.  They practice the very things they claim to detest. 

[Dashinka 24,479]

1 hour ago, B_J said:

I'm just reading some Facebook posts from people in Uvalde. While this is tough for them, the people criticizing the cops and turning this political are just making it worse. 

 

I think there is a place and time to respectfully discuss how to prevent this from happening again, like how it has been here on VJ, but people trying to score political points off this are disgusting and are not helping the people of Uvalde. As one person said in a Facebook post, "I just wish they'd leave our town and let us heal"

Unfortunately, this is a fairly common response.  I remember years ago when I was a firefighter, we had an incident where two young children were killed in a trailer fire.  It was a very unfortunate event, but the residents of the mobile home park were certain if we had gotten there 5 minutes earlier we would have saved the kids.  No one wanted to discuss that the parent was sleeping, and the kids were playing with matches (which actually started the fire), and by the time a neighbor noticed the fire from outside the trailer and reported it to 911, the kids were more than likely already gone (they were found hiding in the closet of the room that initially caught fire), all the criticism was on the fire department response. 

 

This is not to say the response to this school shooting was perfect, but we do not know enough yet to heap the blame or criticism on the people that were the first responders to this incident.

[Dashinka 24,479]

Hmm, apparently the Babylon Bee is becoming more of a truthful news organization.

 

Beto Interrupts Press Conference To Remind Everyone He's A Giant #######

 

 

AUSTIN, TX—As leadership in Texas held a press conference to give updates on the tragic school shooting in Uvalde, candidate for governor Beto O'Rourke took the time to drop by and remind everyone he's a giant #######. 

 

"Governor Abbott and people of Texas, my name is Robert Francis, and I am a massive #######," he began. "I am not just a ####### but a tool, and a wanker as well! Vote for me this November!"

 

The bizarre weirdo then began to pass out "VOTE FOR BETO!" campaign literature to the stunned members of the audience.

 

https://babylonbee.com/news/beto-interrupts-press-conference-to-remind-everyone-hes-a-piece-of-garbage

[yuna628 9,671]

8 hours ago, LIBrty4all said:

I know we don't agree on all things "guns".  They aren't for you, and that's fine.  I grew up with them from a very young age.  Have taught every member of my family (as well as many, many a shooter outside me house) proper gun etiquette.  But I would never suggest YOU own guns, unless/until YOU were comfortable with them.  And it takes time and training, and unless something drastic happens in your life (hopefully never!), you will probably die feeling the way you do now.  Again, that's fine.

I also don't recall you being a proponent for taking them away.  So really, other than ownership, we DO see eye-to-eye, because we both want good people to own and use guns properly, and we both want senseless murders like this to be a thing of the past, to never happen again.  As details emerge, I agree, the police failed miserably here, at least by virtue of NOT charging the fort in the face of danger.  I cannot explain why that is, exactly, just as I cannot explain why thousands and thousands of kids went to school in the 70's & 80's with guns in their trucks, and knives in their pockets, yet we NEVER had mass school shootings.  But I can only postulate that it comes down to stronger, more moral people, with respect for others' lives and property.  The young men back then were more righteous, and prone to "do the right thing" than the kids of today.  I see all kinds of ideas bandied about... the internet, social media, media coverage, violent games (I am a firm believer in this one; teaches kids a practiced lack of concern for life in general).  These and several more.

But two things come to mind, one which we have all discussed before, and NB has mentioned again in both threads... there is TOO MUCH coverage of stuff like this.  If something like this HAD happened in the 70s, it wasn't all over the internet and news 24/7.  While it sickens the majority of us, there will be a crowd to which it appeals... others with the same deranged mind of this kid.  The other thing is allowing these people to get away with it.  Thankfully, this thug was killed.... no trial, no mistrial, no appeal, no cost to the taxpayers.  Just D.E.D.  And that shall help the misery of what he did pass a little bit faster.  (I say this due to what is going on today with the Parkland shooting; I think it is RIDICULOUS that we are two years post-murder-spree, and cannot even pick a jury to decide what to do with that punk.  Put him to death, period.  A) it means he will NEVER do it again, and 2) do this enough times, and hopefully the sick individuals who contemplate these sort of sprees (might) think twice.  IDK.  Maybe that's not how it would play out, but I can assure you that the opposite is true now... these thugs are sensationalized, and let's say the Parkland kid gets life in prison... there will be at LEAST 10 others who will seek to emulate him.  

 

As @Mike E has said, diagnosing mental illness is a tough thing.  There are ALWAYS signs, after the fact.  And sometimes (as in this case), them SEEM damning... but were they so damning a month ago?  There are a metric butt-load of kids who have "issues" at home, growing up, etc., who will never stoop so low as to take a life.  But pinpointing that exact point in some young kid's life (nay, even in young adults) is probably next to impossible, especially for those close enough to see it coming.

There really is no good answer.  We already have gun laws, and KNOWN criminals don't abide by them.  In the case of this kid, the one troubling aspect of it for me is the COST of the guns he allegedly had; this was NOT normal hardware for a kid of 18 to own; heck, I have some pretty pricey stuff, but not the level this kid had.  And when I was 18, I owned probably 3 guns, the total of which cost under $500... for those not in the know, the Daniel Defense AR-15 that is alleged to have been one of the weapons used, is a pricey gun, to the tune of 2-4X more costly of other AR-15s.  And while there is something to be said for buying quality, I personally never owned a weapon that expensive until I was in my later years... (much later, let's just leave it there).  So... HOW did this thug afford/purchase such?  Or was it a gift?  Still many details missing.  Cannot speculate.

 

I think most of us here agree on the whole "thugs murdering for the fun of it" even more than we agree on the topic of abortion, and that's a pretty agreeable topic overall for such a diverse crowd.  The question remains... HOW do we stop it, or at least make it better.  We are NOT headed in the right direction.  I'd like to think that if my own son, living at home, exhibited tendencies that would lead me to even SUSPECT he might do something like this Uvalde punk, that I would either ensure he never had access to a gun (at a minimum), or turned him into law enforcement (weak, since they cannot do anything until/unless a crime is committed or about to be committed).  But that comes down to personal intestinal fortitude... that one thing that I feel is lacking in today's society, especially amongst the younger men.  It certainly is MUCH different than it was when I was growing up as a late teen & early adult.

 

 

I appreciate your thoughts here. Both me and my husband have played games (many violent ones that require skillful shooting) for most of our lives, we have similar attitudes about guns and are able to distinguish from reality. If someone is mentally ill, these kinds of stimuli certainly may not be helpful and increase or reinforce behaviors. The shooter's home life still sounds pretty awful (I see both parents have been tracked down and well.. they don't seem like the sort of persons that belong procreating) and I can only see that as being another area that led him to a complete mental collapse. I also see he had been arrested before for saying he intended on doing this to a school said date several years ago. He killed animals, tortured them on streaming services, had self-harmed, and had used bb guns. This pattern of behavior, arrest, and statements he made? Should he still have obtained a gun like that so easily? I too thought about the money issue.. but if he felt like doing this four years ago, it would seem he had been building his life savings for it. His home life is no excuse for his actions, but they are all factors to explain why he was the way he was. No adult in his life stepped up to do the right thing.

 

There are always complaints about the media glorifying these stories.  I think it is apt to report on these things and remember those persons that died. Those of us that didn't experience 9/11 themselves watched it on TV for days and weeks afterward. A nation of people were traumatized, but the new generation has no memory of it anymore. Kids aren't so hyper focused on TV anymore, they are glued to the internet and invent personalities for themselves. There is a trend for these killers to spend time involved in some very dark places, and are encouraged by others to act out their violent fantasies for adoration or attention they aren't getting from their families. How do we stop that?

[Crazy Cat 41,806]

14 minutes ago, yuna628 said:

and had used bb guns.

So did every kid in my town as as kid....... But, to my knowledge, none of us intentionally shot anyone with BBs. 

 

There will be talk, talk, talk about school security......but until people take REAL action, these tragedies will continue. 

[yuna628 9,671]

2 hours ago, Mike E said:

Why is it FB, Instagram, and Twitter can immediately, and automatically ferret out, delete, ban,  and cancel anyone who suggests Covid was deliberately  created in a lab, ivermectin works, the laptop was owned by Hunter, the 2020 election was rigged, women who don’t menstruate aren’t women, Ilhan married her brother, global warming is a hoax, etc but it can’t seems to detect and delete nut jobs who post their plans to mass murder?

 

Seriously. What is up with that? Social media’s priorities for censorship are bizarre and criminal .
 

 I hope libs enjoy their safe little spaces.  

So I just want to explain something that can often seem really confusing and frustrating to people about websites and moderation. I used to help run a website that had at one point , a high number of members. Now we're talking 100s of thousands not millions or billions of accounts. We had a small team, something like 10, to try and cover different timezones, but this was a volunteer job so not everyone would actually do the job and some just didn't do the job at all. This website was organized by someone with a strict POV, and very critical of anyone that used free speech to say anything at all they didn't like. It wasn't just basic rules and decorum type stuff. If you so much as stated you were an atheist or said women could wear pants, the owner might flip out. And the weird thing about that was, the type of website it was, attracted people from all around the world, all walks of life, all stages of mental distress or bad home lives, young people, and older people. We had sections just like this one where people spent all day long screaming at one another, and then we had other sections where people got along just fine. The younger and more disturbed of mind the demographic got though, the more angry and troublemaking some members became - trying to dox, post porn, hurl insults, how 9/11 wasn't real or the earth was flat and aliens came into their bedroom at night, to discuss how much they wanted to harm themselves or others and on and on. Some stuff was really disturbing and it was draining to deal with every day. We'd get death threats, get accused of censorship, and more. Eventually some kid would get really mad and try hacking. Chatrooms we had were even harder to deal with. This was before social media of course, and once that started everyone had their new darkest corners to play in.

 

As far as I'm aware about facebook and other companies, in an attempt to relieve burdens on human moderation (which have long complained about the poor pay/hours spent viewing the worst of the worst, and even suicide rates) they've made an algorithm to 'help'. Whenever I see problematic posts on twitter that were removed (or not removed), claims that an actual human even looked at the ticket are slim. Facebook has an even worse track record of this. One of the groups I'm on recently had an ex-member make multiple claims against them, which resulted in a group suspension for absolutely false reasons. I'm confident no one actually investigated. You are not going to catch everything on these websites, most are not going to be handled by a human, and if they are it's going to be a judgement call in which their hands are usually tied. They will get clapback if they do remove, and clapback if they don't. Facebook had a $52 million settlement with their moderating team recently and that amounted to each current and former moderator receiving $1,000 for their distress... big whoop. https://www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/facebook-content-moderators-say-they-receive-little-support-despite-company-n1266891  https://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/the-human-cost-of-online-content-moderation  https://www.theverge.com/2019/2/25/18229714/cognizant-facebook-content-moderator-interviews-trauma-working-conditions-arizona  These types of things are simply going to make these companies try and rely on imperfect AI even more. I can even imagine there's some kind of quota. And if it's relying on someone to report it to a moderator in the first place, well consider that it's a dark corner of the internet - unlikely to be reported if everyone talking about shooting up a school actually agrees with the subject matter. This school shooter used more obscure social media companies to stream. I see the Buffalo shooter had a former law enforcement friend that discussed all these things with him and never reported it.

Edited May 27, 2022 by yuna628

[Mike E 11,739]

If anyone posts on FB that the 2020 election was rigged the software algorithms automatically ban them.

 

Yet we know the algorithms don’t ban people who promise to mass murder.  

 

Is it harder to the latter than the former? Maybe.  I don’t see why.

 

But even if it is, shouldn’t the resources be spent on solving the latter versus the former?

Edited May 27, 2022 by Mike E

[yuna628 9,671]

10 minutes ago, Mike E said:

If anyone post on FB that the 2020 election was rigged the software algorithms automatically ban them. Yet we know the algorithms don’t ban people who promise to mass murder.  Is it harder to the latter than the former? Maybe.  I don’t see why. But even if it is, shouldn’t the resources be spent on solving the latter versus the former?

I can't tell you how it works 100%, but how does an AI determine if "i'm gonna kill you'' is 'joking' or not? Rather than just a blanket "the election was rigged"? And sure all kinds of resources should be spent on proper moderation, but these companies are lazy and don't care. Aside the fact that they make the rules, you agree to the rules when you join, and they can change those rules in strange ways however they see fit.  They simply don't have enough staff, and they aren't taking care of the staff that they have. I don't think they care at all. 

 

We can't even agree what content gets moderated on this site, for instance. 😉

Edited May 27, 2022 by yuna628

[Boiler 45,442]

We are wandering but TheHill had a very nasty comments section and then one day poof it was gone.

 

The Hill has removed its comment section, as there are many other forums for readers to participate in the conversation. We invite you to join the discussion on Facebook and Twitter.

SHARETWEET

 

Sort of funny they just passed the buck.

 

HuffPo which I rarely go to sometimes has comments available not sure if anybody uses it. Or perhaps they just delete most stuff.

 

Independent and Guardian are interesting cases, and I would love to know what goes on behind the scenes. I think Independent had a auto delete ban system if you were reported too many times so I think everybody reported everybody else until there was pretty much nobody left.

 

Guardian just now open comments to a very few stories that are either non contentious like Sport or where they expect support. For some reason they pre moderate some areas and are very quick to close comments down if they are going against their theme. I have also seen some really weird stuff happen, comments with a lot of likes suddenly lose them, other ones suddenly pop up out of nowhere so I am pretty sure they fix it.

 

Interesting the games that are played.

 

And of course Twitter it seems has been fiddling the stats for years.

 

Facebook I do not really know as I do not use it for that sort of thing.

 

I knew a lady who was a Moderator on a site, must have been 30 years ago, let us say it was for people with certain interests, I had at the time no idea what it was. Well before this sort of thing became common. And was probably doable with limited volume, as are a couple of groups I go to with very active participants.

 

Places like Facebook etc not a chance, no way individuals can keep up with it and AI?, how many variants of English are there, I could post something that most Americans would not understand but would be a clear ToS violation if they did. And then you add in all the other languages and dialects. I seem to remember complaints that Facebook had cracked down in one area, but Spanish speakers had not been addressed.

 

 

 

 

[Redro 4,611]

I am so shocked at the suggestions people think arming teachers is the right course of action. 

1.) Teachers are already overworked an underpaid. Now they need to keep up to train to deal with active shooters and be prepared to shoot someone who comes into the classroom?

2.) Is anyone here a teacher? Teachers are constantly moving around the classroom trying to focus on 30 different individuals... now at the back of their mind they need to think about how to react (with a weapon) towards an active shooter?

3.) Little kids are super touchy feely and will get everywhere and anywhere... Where should an elementary teacher store the gun? On their person or at the desk... 

The gun can't be super secured because they need immediate access to said gun if an active shooter arrives... Where should the gun be in an elementary school?

4.) If THE POLICE aren't comfortable entering a building because they're scared they'll be shot what does that mean for teachers? There is already a shortage... are schools now only going to hire teachers who state they are comfortable teaching knowing they could get shot/ are fine with shooting someone in front of their students? 

 

If someone can answer these questions I would be very happy... 

I'm all for hiring more armed guards or making sure only authorized people enter the school... but I don't understand the logistics of arming elementary school teachers. 

(only talking elementary as the school in question was an elementary school). 

[Boiler 45,442]

11 minutes ago, yuna628 said:

I can't tell you how it works 100%, but how does an AI determine if "i'm gonna kill you'' is 'joking' or not? Rather than just a blanket "the election was rigged"? And sure all kinds of resources should be spent on proper moderation, but these companies are lazy and don't care. Aside the fact that they make the rules, you agree to the rules when you join, and they can change those rules in strange ways however they see fit.  They simply don't have enough staff, and they aren't taking care of the staff that they have. I don't think they care at all. 

 

We can't even agree what content gets moderated on this site, for instance. 😉

Or You are killing me?

 

Wonder how they are going to deal with the speech is violence crowd, using the wrong pronoun?

[Boiler 45,442]

Just now, ROK2USA said:

I am so shocked at the suggestions people think arming teachers is the right course of action. 

1.) Teachers are already overworked an underpaid. Now they need to keep up to train to deal with active shooters and be prepared to shoot someone who comes into the classroom?

2.) Is anyone here a teacher? Teachers are constantly moving around the classroom trying to focus on 30 different individuals... now at the back of their mind they need to think about how to react (with a weapon) towards an active shooter?

3.) Little kids are super touchy feely and will get everywhere and anywhere... Where should an elementary teacher store the gun? On their person or at the desk... 

The gun can't be super secured because they need immediate access to said gun if an active shooter arrives... Where should the gun be in an elementary school?

4.) If THE POLICE aren't comfortable entering a building because they're scared they'll be shot what does that mean for teachers? There is already a shortage... are schools now only going to hire teachers who state they are comfortable teaching knowing they could get shot/ are fine with shooting someone in front of their students? 

 

If someone can answer these questions I would be very happy... 

I'm all for hiring more armed guards or making sure only authorized people enter the school... but I don't understand the logistics of arming elementary school teachers. 

(only talking elementary as the school in question was an elementary school). 

If you are relying on that my thought is in most cases you have already lost it. Just shoot the teacher first.

 

I have thought about it and do not know the answer, maybe there is not one, has taken a very long time to get here and I do not see a path back.

[Crazy Cat 41,806]

2 minutes ago, ROK2USA said:

I am so shocked at the suggestions people think arming teachers is the right course of action. 

1.) Teachers are already overworked an underpaid. Now they need to keep up to train to deal with active shooters and be prepared to shoot someone who comes into the classroom?

2.) Is anyone here a teacher? Teachers are constantly moving around the classroom trying to focus on 30 different individuals... now at the back of their mind they need to think about how to react (with a weapon) towards an active shooter?

3.) Little kids are super touchy feely and will get everywhere and anywhere... Where should an elementary teacher store the gun? On their person or at the desk... 

The gun can't be super secured because they need immediate access to said gun if an active shooter arrives... Where should the gun be in an elementary school?

4.) If THE POLICE aren't comfortable entering a building because they're scared they'll be shot what does that mean for teachers? There is already a shortage... are schools now only going to hire teachers who state they are comfortable teaching knowing they could get shot/ are fine with shooting someone in front of their students? 

 

If someone can answer these questions I would be very happy... 

I'm all for hiring more armed guards or making sure only authorized people enter the school... but I don't understand the logistics of arming elementary school teachers. 

(only talking elementary as the school in question was an elementary school). 

1.  Are teachers prepared for other emergencies...such as CPR?  Use of other emergency equipment?

2.  In an emergency situation, EVERYTHING else is unimportant.

3.  That is easily solved with PROPER storage methods.

4.  The only protection school children have now is to hide and HOPE the shooter doesn't find them.....

Playing hide and seek is not acceptable when lives are at stake.