Breaking: 19 Children, 2 Adults Killed in Texas Elementary School Shooting

Andrew Donaldson

Born and raised in West Virginia, Andrew has since lived and traveled around the world several times over. Though frequently writing about politics out of a sense of duty and love of country, most of the time he would prefer discussions on history, culture, occasionally nerding on aviation, and his amateur foodie tendencies. He can usually be found misspelling/misusing words on Twitter @four4thefire and his writing website Yonder and Home. Andrew is the host of Heard Tell podcast.

Related Post Roulette

36 Responses

  1. Chip Daniels
    Ignored
    says:

    Or as they call it in America, a Tuesday.Report

  2. Kazzy
    Ignored
    says:

    So glad politicians tasked with making sure schools are safe places for children have focused their energies in the right direction: on shielding kids from the word gay instead of bullets.

    Freedom rang a little clearer in Texas today.Report

  3. Jesse
    Ignored
    says:

    In Only Country Where Thing Regularly Happens, Refuses to Do Thing That Would Make Thing Happens Far LessReport

  4. Chip Daniels
    Ignored
    says:

    As before-
    Elections have consequences.

    We keep getting lectures from Savvy Politics-Knowers that Dems need to be more like Republicans, you know, chatter on about Gawd and religion, and guns and Murica standing tall in the saddle, and by gum, then we will win.

    But this has never worked from what I can tell, and the consequences of abandoning things like gun control and sensible foreign policy has only led to disaster.

    The JesusGunsBabies crowd still hates our guts, and everyone remembers Hillary voting with the hawks but not one voter ever crossed over to vote Dem because of it, and whenever the subject of gun control comes up most Dem politicians curl up in a fetal position.Report

    • LeeEsq in reply to Chip Daniels
      Ignored
      says:

      I think this is more complicated than either you or the Savvy are letting on. The Democratic Party can’t talk one hundred percent like the Republicans because then we would be Republicans. We can’t talk about God, mom, apple pie, and the 2nd Amendment as we attempt to defend pluralistic democracy, separation of religion and state, and promote gun control. At the same time the type of rhetoric that the very online likes, whether in their Jacobin or Intersectionalist form, really doesn’t work with the general electorate who tends to find activist speak grating at best and also is much more patriotic in that hokey way than the very online. So going America is a white settler colonist state and the Constitution was slave owner’s document won’t win us enough seats to do actually pass the laws we want.Report

  5. Mike Schilling
    Ignored
    says:

    At least they weren’t reading the wrong kinds of books.Report

  6. Philip H
    Ignored
    says:

    We are a violent nation because we choose to be.

    We are a fearful nation because we choose to be.

    We have more guns then citizens – and in the hands of only a few because we choose it.

    We are bathed in the blood of children regularly because we choose to be.

    We are not a Christian nation for we refuse to spend our riches on those who need it most – including those with mental health issues.

    We are not a Christian nation because we choose the sword for even the mildest inconvenience.

    We are not a Christian nation because we choose to deny the love to our neighbors that we demand for ourselves.

    We have become this monster with our eyes wide open facing front.

    Damn us for doing so.Report

    • Brandon Berg in reply to Philip H
      Ignored
      says:

      One of my least-favorite rhetorical devices is the self-exempting “we.” You say “we,” but clearly you’re referring exclusively to people with whom you have policy disagreements. Not you. You’ve made all the right choices, but you were overruled.

      Just own it. Saying “we” doesn’t make you look any more humble or thoughtful.Report

      • Philip H in reply to Brandon Berg
        Ignored
        says:

        I say we because I’m still a citizen, I still have agency, and I still haven’t been successful in better protecting my kids from all this. I say we because I still choose to own firearms, shoot, and train my children in their safe handling. I say we because this sis an American tragedy and I’m an American. I say we because if the policies and laws I support – which a majority of Americans support despite what our politicians do – have yet to become the law of the land.Report

    • Dark Matter in reply to Philip H
      Ignored
      says:

      So we have a magic wand we can wave to make suicidal mass murderers with no criminal record obey the law? And we haven’t chosen to use it?

      Let me guess, the solution is to vote Blue and with a little bit of gun control, plus outlawing what is already illegal, this problem will go away.Report

      • Philip H in reply to Dark Matter
        Ignored
        says:

        I made a proposal in the other thread – what’s yours?Report

        • Dark Matter in reply to Philip H
          Ignored
          says:

          Outlaw the reporting of his name and agenda. Make it so he’s not a celeb.

          I don’t remember (or didn’t see) what your idea was.Report

          • Kazzy in reply to Dark Matter
            Ignored
            says:

            Well, if they didn’t show his name and photo in THIS CASE, we’d hear all the griping from the right-wing media machine and its followers about how the liberal media was hiding his race and ethnicity. So… good luck with that.

            Because, ya know, they care what … with all their thoughts and prayers.Report

            • Pinky in reply to Kazzy
              Ignored
              says:

              I don’t think Dark Matter meant to do it just in this case.Report

              • Kazzy in reply to Pinky
                Ignored
                says:

                I understand that but my point is certain folks have shown over and over again that when it comes to axes to grind, “Fewer kids being shot in schools,” is relatively low on their list.

                Even if we did this with every shooting going forward, the moment a Black or Brown person was the one pulling the trigger, we’d see right-wing outlets buck this practice.Report

              • Pinky in reply to Kazzy
                Ignored
                says:

                And the moment a white kid…

                What does that observation get us, except demonstrating that things are politicized? We all know that. It doesn’t address the merit of Dark Matter’s suggestion.

                I mean, realistically, even if everyone on this site agreed with a proposal it wouldn’t affect anything, but this exercise is supposed to test ideas.

                ETA: The Daily Wire didn’t break its policy on this one.Report

              • Pinky in reply to Kazzy
                Ignored
                says:

                Also, it was a matter of days ago that this site’s left wing was implying that “it’s for the children” is always fake.

                And I don’t think anyone puts “fewer kids being shot” (whatever the location) low on their list. They may disagree with your preferred policies though.Report

              • Dark Matter in reply to Kazzy
                Ignored
                says:

                the moment a Black or Brown person was the one pulling the trigger, we’d see right-wing outlets buck this practice.

                “The moment”? We already have minorities do this at numbers equal to their percentage of population.

                Further, right-wing outlets aren’t suicide attackers. They’d still be around to face whatever the penalties of breaking the law are.Report

  7. Jaybird
    Ignored
    says:

    Two vaguely unpleasant facts:

    I’m glad the border patrol agent was there.

    The use of the term “law enforcement” seems to be inappropriate. Perhaps “bystander” would be more accurate?Report

    • Jaybird in reply to Jaybird
      Ignored
      says:

      Additional information:

      Report

      • DensityDuck in reply to Jaybird
        Ignored
        says:

        I could certainly believe that none of the cops actually hit the guy.

        I’m reminded of that UPS-truck hijacking where the cops shot one hostage and two bystanders and none of the actual hijackers.Report

        • Michael Cain in reply to DensityDuck
          Ignored
          says:

          It’s been a problem for a long time. When I was in college many years ago, the local PD demanded that the city provide them with much more powerful handguns. The effort died after a couple of med school professors spoke at the city council meeting. They pointed out that in the last nine times officers had fired their weapons, they had hit zero suspects but three bystanders. The bystanders survived. The profs stated that in their opinion, all three would have died had the heavier weapons been in use.Report

      • Jaybird in reply to Jaybird
        Ignored
        says:

        Report

    • Philip H in reply to Jaybird
      Ignored
      says:

      If they were employed as police
      Officers or in any other sworn capacity then they are law enforcement. Their ineffective shooting is a different matter.

      It does show, however, that if the trained professionals counts get him initially, the so called “good guy with a gun” wouldn’t have either.Report

    • veronicad in reply to Jaybird
      Ignored
      says:

      I don’t care who he was. I’m just glad he stopped the shooter from harming anyone else.Report

  8. Saul Degraw
    Ignored
    says:

    Yet many people think this is a small price to pay as long as it means being able to vent their resentments at bougie liberals.Report

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.