ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel

Shooting in High School 17 dead

Updated on February 17, 2019

What have the democrats done since this shooting?

Have the Democrats made the country and the people safe from random and isolated mass shootings? I say no, because you can't be protected from random acts of violence. We have over 325 millions people in the US, not counting all the visitors and the illegal aliens. With all of those people, it is to be expected that some few of them are capable and ready to commit these violent acts.

What I have seen the left AKA the Anti Trump people do is to change tacks from their gun control to their new attack. That attack is immigration, illegal alien children, and their parents. This is another issue like gun control where when they had a change to legislate changes they wanted but didn't do anything. The issue is headed by those that just want to nail president Trump for something. They have found a niche in the illegal aliens seeking asylum. They are using the procedure of ICE separating parents from children, and have tagged president Trump. It doesn't matter that this process wasn't created by president Trump, or that it existed under Barack Obama.

No one made this much of an issue before Trump became president. So it is more proof that the issue is we don't like Trump as our president. It is a means to their end of getting rid of a duly elected sitting president. A president that has accomplished more for the country and the people in his first 500 days, than president Obama did in his 8 years.

The US is flooded with homeless people, and the democrat, anti Trump people want to keep the borders open to anyone and wipe out the sovereignty of the US. President Trump tossed this ticking time bomb back to the anti Trumpers by signing and EO to keep children and parents together. He then said, this problem is a legislature problem, and you are the legislature, so legislate your solution to this issue.

Gun Control

There are some people that are still going through the motion of making Gun Control the solution or reduction in school shootings, and I guess in shootings in general.

They have been asked to estimate how many lives these gun control regulations will save. To answer the question we have to use the existing gun control laws, and how they are being enforce to provide a baseline. The baseline is the raw date of shootings. Pick a range of years and go through the data to come up with the quantified baseline of shooting under the current regulations.

Then fully described the proposed New Gun Regulations and apply it to the baseline. Factor, the type of weapon, or weapons used and see if the New Regs would have had any impact on the result. And do this for all the factors in the new regulations that were not covered by existing regulations,. And that will roughly provide the number of lives that could have been saved. This should also include gun deaths that were suicides. Certainly, the regulations on Assault rifles, large magazines, automatic versus semiautomatic wouldn't really be a factor in suicide.

Also include the issue of how Federal and Local Law Enforcement aided in the gun deaths. For example in Parkland, both the local and the FBI FAILED to do their job and as a result 17 students were killed. Forget about arming the teachers, or providing trained guards assigned to the school because Parkland did have a special officer. And the officer and his three fellow deputies listened to the gun shots that killed the students while hiding behind their patrol cars. They never went into the school while the shooting was going on there.

The FBI never investigated Cruz even with credible information.

The Question here is why aren't the Gun Control people making that a major issue in school shooting deaths? How many lives could have been saved, if the Broward Sheriff Deputies, four of them would have actually done their job and went inside the school and confronted Cruz, the shooter? Yet all the gun control people want to do is ignore the failure of the sheriff and the FBI and talk about MORE gun control laws. How are these laws going to stop people from committing Suicide with a handgun. The law doesn't have that kind of filter to detect and stop them from purchasing them, or using ones that they already own!

Are we treating Alcohol, Illegal drugs, and vehicles any more effectively than we do guns?

February 21, 2018 Update

While a forum on the same subject as this article has over 300 posts, none of those posts has a real answer. It is all about party lines

And the one party line is the democrat cry for gun control, or I should say more gun control because we already have gun control laws in the US.

Here is the question that NO Democrat can answer.

If the Democrat version of Gun Control is a solution, then why didn't they create that solution back in 2009-2011. That is when the Democrats under president Barack Obama controlled the congress. In fact, they had a super majority with their 60 votes.

What did they do with that advantage?

Nothing that solved the Gun Issue that is now being blamed on president Trump. Like many things that weren't the fault of president Trump but the failures of the last presidencies, and congresses to not act.

Any Democrats, or anyone that believes that more gun control is the solution to the high school shootings, or any of the mass shootings like the one in Las Vegas, why didn't the Democrats when they had the chance make those gun control laws

February 18. 2018 update

Apparently, I wasn't clear about the Alcohol and Tobacco examples and how they are not really any different when they result in the deaths of their users, and those that were their victims.

While the purpose of Alcohol or Tobacco is pleasure for the user, there is no doubt that they are both deadly in both their normal use, and abnormal use.

  • But when their use and abuse result in death and injury to not only the user, but their victims, then they are the same as guns.

Yes, the reason that guns were invented was as a deadly force to protect as well as be an offensive weapon in war. But that doesn't mean that the gun owners buys guns as an offensive weapon, or that they would even shoot them in a defensive situation. There are more than two million events in the US where guns have been used defensively to protect the gun owners. And only have of them actually fired their gun.

Having the government infringe on the gun owners rights under the 2nd amendment is exactly why we have the 2nd amendment. The founders having gone through the Revolutionary War had some real insight into the problems of large federal government. They wanted a limited federal government, and no standing military, only the home Militia. And that spawned the 2nd Amendment. The 3rd amendment was about your right not to have troops quartered on your property.

Unfortunately, SCOTUS misinterpreted the Interstate Commerce Clause which is only 2 lines in length. That misinterpretation along with them removing apportionment allowing the 16th Amendment to pass. Gave the government the ability to fund the increase in government, and support a large standing military.

Now, the liberals want to finish the job and put holes in the rights of gun ownership of the 2nd amendment.

What has the US done with the increase in government. They have put the US into continual and losing wars for the past 100 years. And that was what the founders tried to protect the country from doing with the 2nd Amendment.

  • The Bill of Rights was added to the US Constitution for a reason, a well thought out and experienced reasons of the founders.
  • The US government today doesn't want to be bound by that constitution.
  • The is a major problem for our Democratic Republic.

What does the shooting in Parkland Florida mean today?

As with all mass shooting deaths, and especially when it involves school children, it means grieve for all the families that were tragically touched by it. This is followed by rage, and anger because it is thought that there must have been ways to have stopped it. Or there would have been some kind of warning.

Some people mostly on the left, always point to the guns. But what other deaths that don't involve guns result in the recall of the product used in those deaths. When someone dies as a result of drunk or drunk influenced driver, do people come out and demand that the alcohol and the vehicle need to be taken away from all the other people that don't drive drunk and kill innocent people.

Of course not.

For very different reasons, groups of people have tried to take away alcohol use from the country. They were so adamant about removing the temptation of alcohol use they even pass an amendment to the US constitution to make it a federal crime. The eighteenth amendment on the prohibition of alcohol lasted from 1920 and ended with the passing of another amendment, the twenty first amendment.

The point here is that you cannot take away, even by federal law created by a US Amendment, what the public wants from them.

During the time that the eighteenth amendment was in effect, the Mafia supplied more alcohol to the public than was available before prohibition. This was thirteen years of wasted law enforcement, and a leap in crimes. The crime of prohibition was eclipsed by the crimes of murder, and other felonies that supported the violation of supplying alcohol.

Today, we still have a problem with Alcohol caused deaths, injuries, and even medical problems. Yet, even Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) have been unable to get people to stop driving under the influence, or getting rid of the alcohol.

MADD even got the criminal laws changed so that deaths, and injuries caused by drunk drivers were made strict liability. That means that the criminal element of Intent or Mens Rea was imputed by the fact that the person was drunk.

It didn't matter than whether the driver intended to drive when they were drunk. And it also removed the mitigation of their crime through the use of diminished capacity because they were drunk. Even if someone got drunk from someone giving more alcohol than they thought they were getting, it didn't matter, it was still a felony of vehicular manslaughter.

Now to parallel the gun deaths, the gun control argument is that it is not the person, it is the gun. Therefore, the solution is to take away not only their guns but everyone's guns. When one person causes vehicular death, and even multiple mass deaths does that encapsulate either taking away the access to alcohol or even access to vehicles of anyone else.

The answer is NO.

Then why are guns different? The alcohol and the vehicular are one unit, and the guns are the other unit. But out of these three units, the focus and the overreach to the rest of the public is to the guns.

The gun control argument is faulty, and it is not a solution at all.

Look at the contrast to the prohibition of alcohol, even to the extent of making it an amendment. It didn't stop or even slow down alcohol consumption in the US. And alcohol didn't even have a constitutional amendment to give it a right. It was a very strong popular desire of the people in the country.

The taking of any number of illegal drugs is also a federal crime, and we have lost the war on drugs. This also causes deaths and injuries. Half of the gun deaths are the result of suicides. And it doesn't matter to the gun control people as they bury the most important issue and the is suicide. And suicide is accomplished using many different methods and just one of them is using a gun.

We already have tough drug laws, but the access to illegal drugs is ubiquitous for the same reason that alcohol was plentiful during prohibition. The criminal element is always out there ready to add another criminal product to their list.

We have over twenty billion dollars of illegal drugs coming across our open border every years from the Mexican and other drug cartels. BTW, they also deal in gun running and human trafficking. But these gun control advocates don't care about the border. And that is something that they could actually make work.

These illegal drugs also cause more crimes as the cartel has to protect and enforce their criminal drug industry. Then there is the indirect mental and physical hazard to the illegal drug user. These side effects like suicide, committing felonies to support their habit, and health care for those that get sick physically and mentally. And how many other deaths are they responsible for in their drug induced states?

Now, it is just come out that the mass gun killer Nicholas Cruz may have been a fan of the Islamic Terrorists. Looking at his computer activity it has been found they he was out there on the Internet with his guns and knives, and in a depressed stated.

He even made a statement on one cyber site that he wanted to be a professional Mass School Shooter. The site turned in that information to the FBI. the FBI came out and contacted the site owner, and then apparently did nothing.

Maybe that is the lead that could have saved the dead students at Parkland?.

The 2nd Amendment is our protection against a Government that is trying to take the people out of the government

The 2nd Amendment to the US Constitution was intelligently put there by the founders of the country. It was to be able to protect the people and the country against a government that turned against the people.

Taking the guns away from the people would allow that bad government to easy take over the people. It would also allow a foreign government from doing the same thing.

That is why owning even military grade weapons doesn't seem as bad as the liberal want it to sound. We currently have that kind of problem at the US Border, as the drug cartel has better arms, and technology than the border agents. The cartel also has more people than there are border agents.

That is why the border patrol has a difficult job in protecting the border. It is the same government that doesn't want the border patrol to be adequately armed, that don't want the citizen militia to be armed at all.

Many of the gun control people say they don't want our guns, but that is not true. Their knee jerk reaction to these kind of events is always gun control. And that is controlling the guns ownership of law abiding citizens.

Remember how the government Totally Failed their primary duty to protect the country and its people on 911. Can we really count on them or even trust them in the future.


    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment
    • bradmasterOCcal profile imageAUTHOR

      Brad Masters 

      3 days ago from Orange County California BSIT BSL JD

      2 17 19

      39 59

    • bradmasterOCcal profile imageAUTHOR

      Brad Masters 

      10 months ago from Orange County California BSIT BSL JD

      Stats for my article using hp guidelines

      Need Some Goals?

      Articles with these attributes typically get 300% more traffic.











      2120 words in this article, while hp calls 1250 words the top and plus is what I have here.

      Is your Hub evergreen? Evergreen Hubs can earn for months and years to come.

    • bradmasterOCcal profile imageAUTHOR

      Brad Masters 

      12 months ago from Orange County California BSIT BSL JD

      Did you hear the one about the Assigned School Broward Deputy that never went into the school. Or the one where three fellow deputies hid behind their patrol cars while Cruz was shooting people dead inside the school.

    • bradmasterOCcal profile imageAUTHOR

      Brad Masters 

      12 months ago from Orange County California BSIT BSL JD

      Contrast when the Republicans get shot at


      Lawmakers, Hill staffers and police officers at the U.S. Capitol were in shock Wednesday in the aftermath of the early-morning shooting at congressional Republicans' baseball practice. The attack left Steve Scalise, the number-three House Republican, and four others wounded and recovering in local hospitals. Many of the Congress members who had to hit the dirt to avoid being caught in the crossfire, kept their baseball jerseys and cleats on as they hopped from one cable interview to another at the Capitol, recounting how they survived, avoiding the bullets that hit the dirt around them.


      Everything We Know About Alexandria Shooter James T. Hodgkinson

      Sixty-six-year-old Illinois home inspector was a Bernie Sanders campaign volunteer and vocal Trump critic

      "This is a horrible aberration, and it makes us fear for our security," says a visibly shaken Rep. Chuck Fleischmann, who has cuts and scrapes on his arms and knees from hitting the dugout floor to avoid the bullets. While he talks to reporters, he's still in a dirt-covered jersey emblazoned with the word "Republican." The morning's tragedy is just beginning to dawn on him. "Just a horrible ... experience. And actually, now thinking [about] the magnitude of the shots that were fired and the carnage that was there, I'm still in a state of shock."

      Fleischmann represents Chattanooga, Tennessee, which witnessed a targeted mass shooting in 2015 when Mohammad Youssuf Abdulazeez drove to two separate Marine centers and opened fire, killing four. In the aftermath of that shooting, just as in the aftermath of Wednesday's attack, Democrats called for stricter gun-control measures, but Fleischmann and most others in the GOP have resisted.

      "It's about the person. We have people in this country, sadly, who have just a horrific value system – somebody like this, today, who would do that, people who engage in terrorism. They will unfortunately find their weapon of choice," Fleischmann tells Rolling Stone. "What we need to do is focus on keeping Americans safe. But I am, and will always be, a strong supporter of the Second Amendment. Put it this way: If we had had more weapons there, we'd be able to subdue the shooter more quickly. Thank God that the Capitol Police were there and were armed, because otherwise we'd have had a situation where there'd be a lot more damage."

    • bradmasterOCcal profile imageAUTHOR

      Brad Masters 

      12 months ago from Orange County California BSIT BSL JD

      Here is the question that NO Democrat can answer.

      If the Democrat version of Gun Control is a solution, then why didn't they create that solution back in 2009-2011. That is when the Democrats under president Barack Obama controlled the congress. In fact, they had a super majority with their 60 votes.

    • bradmasterOCcal profile imageAUTHOR

      Brad Masters 

      12 months ago from Orange County California BSIT BSL JD


      Did you ever notice, that the United States isn't the UK or Australia?

      The second amendment referred to a militia, and as the army modernized their weapons then the militia upgrades theirs.

      What does that have to do with gun control? Did you even read this article.

      How would gun control work in the US?

    • Corey Campbell profile image

      Corey Campbell 

      12 months ago from United Kingdom

      This article fails to point out one major point: making guns illegal does work. In practice, it worked in the UK, Australia and many other places. Also the second amendment originally referred to guns that fired less rounds in a minute than some weapons can in a second which, since the technology has evolved, so too should the way we control the technology.

    • bradmasterOCcal profile imageAUTHOR

      Brad Masters 

      12 months ago from Orange County California BSIT BSL JD

      To all


      Here is a discussion on the Nicholas Cruz shooting in Florida.

      It starts out with prayers are not enough, to stop the senseless killing. It then becomes a discussion about gun control. Then it just becomes personal between the posters. The end result after 160 posts has no resolution and neither side has changed their opinion.

      Gun control exists and has existed for decades, The problem is that it has not been enforced very well. In this particular case, it wasn’t gun control that allowed the shooting, it was a failure of the FBI to investigate a solid lead on Cruz.


      The Killing of Innocent School Children

      Our thoughts and prayers are with you and the victims is not enough to stop these senseless killings.

      First reply

      America yawns. The majority of the country couldn't care less about mass killings with yet another AK-47. If people really did, they would be pounding on Congress for solutions.

      150 replies later

      • The stats for every other western nation concerning violence on TV, video games, etc. line up with ours. The only difference in America? The number of guns. There is a solution. Many Americans just don't like it. You have to ask yourself at some point: Whose freedom am I worried about infringing on? For me, it the freedom of students to live.

      Perhaps it will do you good to read, "Is the damage to society from the misuse of guns worth the freedom to have guns?" at

      The only difference in America is the number of guns?

      1. As a nation we're fat. Others aren't.

      2. We are much more open, geographically, than other nations.

      3. We are less socialistic than other nations, less of a "nanny state".

      4. We are richer, monetarily, than most other nations.

      5. We pride ourselves on our freedoms - freedoms that other nations don't have.

      That's 5 differences, and I'm sure you can come up with 50 more if you try. Pretty obvious that the number of guns isn't the only difference, so the conclusion that it therefore has to be guns is totally false. Try again?

      Last reply

      Who says gun owners are "not willing to compromise"?

    • bradmasterOCcal profile imageAUTHOR

      Brad Masters 

      12 months ago from Orange County California BSIT BSL JD

      To all

      I updated this article with the 2nd Amendment info.

    • bradmasterOCcal profile imageAUTHOR

      Brad Masters 

      12 months ago from Orange County California BSIT BSL JD


      continuing with Tobacco.

      People who die each year from their own cigarette smoking or exposure to secondhand smoke. more than 480,000

      Kids under 18 alive today who will ultimately die from smoking (unless smoking rates decline) 5.6 million

      People in the U.S. who currently suffer from smoking-caused illness 16 million

    • bradmasterOCcal profile imageAUTHOR

      Brad Masters 

      12 months ago from Orange County California BSIT BSL JD


      One important difference between Tobbaco, Alcohol, and Guns is that Guns are the only one that has a Constitutional Amendment. There is no constitutional right to have Alcohol, or Tobacco. And yet, we can't take these known killers of Alcohol or Tobacco from the people.

      Whether the primary purpose of a gun is different from that of alcohol or tobacco, the result is still the same. When used, or really misused it can cause death or serious injury. There is also a difference in that deaths and injuries can be lessened or stopped in the case of alcohol and tobacco.


      Alcohol Use in the United States:

      Prevalence of Drinking: According to the 2015 National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH), 86.4 percent of people ages 18 or older reported that they drank alcohol at some point in their lifetime; 70.1 percent reported that they drank in the past year; 56.0 percent reported that they drank in the past month.1

      Prevalence of Binge Drinking and Heavy Alcohol Use: In 2015, 26.9 percent of people ages 18 or older reported that they engaged in binge drinking in the past month; 7.0 percent reported that they engaged in heavy alcohol use in the past month.2 (See "Definitions" below for definitions of binge drinking and heavy alcohol use.)

      Alcohol Use Disorder (AUD) in the United States:

      Adults (ages 18+): According to the 2015 NSDUH, 15.1 million adults ages 18 and older3 (6.2 percent of this age group4) had AUD. This includes 9.8 million men3 (8.4 percent of men in this age group4) and 5.3 million women3 (4.2 percent of women in this age group4).

      About 6.7 percent of adults who had AUD in the past year received treatment. This includes 7.4 percent of males and 5.4 percent of females with AUD in this age group.5

      Youth (ages 12–17): According to the 2015 NSDUH, an estimated 623,000 adolescents ages 12–176 (2.5 percent of this age group7) had AUD. This number includes 298,000 males6 (2.3 percent of males in this age group7) and 325,000 females6 (2.7 percent of females in this age group7).

      About 5.2 percent of youth who had AUD in the past year received treatment. This includes 5.1 percent of males and 5.3 percent of females with AUD in this age group.5

      Alcohol-Related Deaths:

      An estimated 88,0008 people (approximately 62,000 men and 26,000 women8) die from alcohol-related causes annually, making alcohol the third leading preventable cause of death in the United States. The first is tobacco, and the second is poor diet and physical inactivity.9

      In 2014, alcohol-impaired driving fatalities accounted for 9,967 deaths (31 percent of overall driving fatalities).10

      Economic Burden:

      In 2010, alcohol misuse cost the United States $249.0 billion.11

      Three-quarters of the total cost of alcohol misuse is related to binge drinking.11

      Global Burden:

      In 2012, 3.3 million deaths, or 5.9 percent of all global deaths (7.6 percent for men and 4.0 percent for women), were attributable to alcohol consumption.12

      In 2014, the World Health Organization reported that alcohol contributed to more than 200 diseases and injury-related health conditions, most notably DSM–IV alcohol dependence (see sidebar), liver cirrhosis, cancers, and injuries.13 In 2012, 5.1 percent of the burden of disease and injury worldwide (139 million disability-adjusted life-years) was attributable to alcohol consumption.12

      Globally, alcohol misuse was the fifth leading risk factor for premature death and disability in 2010. Among people between the ages of 15 and 49, it is the first.14 In the age group 20–39 years, approximately 25 percent of the total deaths are alcohol attributable.15

      Family Consequences:

      More than 10 percent of U.S. children live with a parent with alcohol problems, according to a 2012 study.16

      Underage Drinking:

      Prevalence of Underage Alcohol Use:

      Prevalence of Drinking: According to the 2015 NSDUH, 33.1 percent of 15-year-olds report that they have had at least 1 drink in their lives.17 About 7.7 million people ages 12–2018 (20.3 percent of this age group19) reported drinking alcohol in the past month (19.8 percent of males and 20.8 percent of females19).

      Prevalence of Binge Drinking: According to the 2015 NSDUH, approximately 5.1 million people18 (about 13.4 percent19) ages 12–20 (13.4 percent of males and 13.3 percent of females19) reported binge drinking in the past month.

      Prevalence of Heavy Alcohol Use: According to the 2015 NSDUH, approximately 1.3 million people18 (about 3.3 percent19) ages 12–20 (3.6 percent of males and 3.0 percent of females19) reported heavy alcohol use in the past month.

      Consequences of Underage Alcohol Use:

      Research indicates that alcohol use during the teenage years could interfere with normal adolescent brain development and increase the risk of developing AUD. In addition, underage drinking contributes to a range of acute consequences, including injuries, sexual assaults, and even deaths—including those from car crashes.20

      Alcohol and College Students:

      Prevalence of Alcohol Use:

      Prevalence of Drinking: According to the 2015 NSDUH, 58.0 percent of full-time college students ages 18–22 drank alcohol in the past month compared with 48.2 percent of other persons of the same age.21

      Prevalence of Binge Drinking: According to the 2015 NSDUH, 37.9 percent of college students ages 18–22 reported binge drinking in the past month compared with 32.6 percent of other persons of the same age.21

      Prevalence of Heavy Alcohol Use: According to the 2015 NSDUH, 12.5 percent of college students ages 18–22 reported heavy alcohol use in the past month compared with 8.5 percent of other persons of the same age.21

      Consequences—Researchers estimate that each year:

      1,825 college students between the ages of 18 and 24 die from alcohol-related unintentional injuries, including motor-vehicle crashes.22

      696,000 students between the ages of 18 and 24 are assaulted by another student who has been drinking.23

      97,000 students between the ages of 18 and 24 report experiencing alcohol-related sexual assault or date rape.23

      Roughly 20 percent of college students meet the criteria for AUD.24

      About 1 in 4 college students report academic consequences from drinking, including missing class, falling behind in class, doing poorly on exams or papers, and receiving lower grades overall.25

      Alcohol and Pregnancy:

      The prevalence of Fetal Alcohol Syndrome (FAS) in the United States was estimated by the Institute of Medicine in 1996 to be between 0.5 and 3.0 cases per 1,000.26

      More recent reports from specific U.S. sites report the prevalence of FAS to be 2 to 7 cases per 1,000, and the prevalence of Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders (FASD) to be as high as 20 to 50 cases per 1,000.27,28

      Alcohol and the Human Body:

      In 2015, of the 78,529 liver disease deaths among individuals ages 12 and older, 47.0 percent involved alcohol. Among males, 49,695 liver disease deaths occurred and 49.5 percent involved alcohol. Among females, 28,834 liver disease deaths occurred and 43.5 percent involved alcohol.29

      Among all cirrhosis deaths in 2013, 47.9 percent were alcohol related. The proportion of alcohol-related cirrhosis was highest (76.5 percent) among deaths of persons ages 25–34, followed by deaths of persons ages 35–44, at 70.0 percent.30

      In 2009, alcohol-related liver disease was the primary cause of almost 1 in 3 liver transplants in the United States.31

      Drinking alcohol increases the risk of cancers of the mouth, esophagus, pharynx, larynx, liver, and breast.32

      Health Benefits of Moderate Alcohol Consumption:

      Moderate alcohol consumption, according to the 2015–2020 Dietary Guidelines for Americans, is up to 1 drink per day for women and up to 2 drinks per day for men.33

      Moderate alcohol consumption may have beneficial effects on health. These include decreased risk for heart disease and mortality due to heart disease, decreased risk of ischemi

    • bradmasterOCcal profile imageAUTHOR

      Brad Masters 

      12 months ago from Orange County California BSIT BSL JD


      I agree, it must be really comforting to the criminals to know that they would be the only non law enforcement people having guns. Do you think that this tragedy would have been able to happen as easily in Texas as it did in Florida?

    • breakfastpop profile image


      12 months ago

      If we ban all guns, the good people will be vulnerable and the bad guys will have a field day.

    • bradmasterOCcal profile imageAUTHOR

      Brad Masters 

      12 months ago from Orange County California BSIT BSL JD


      I would add to my article saying that we all know that Tobacco is a killer, and we have known it since 1964 when they started putting warning labels on the cigarettes.

      Tobacco as well as Alcohol doesn't have a primary use of killing, but that doesn't make it less than a killer. It is illogical to say that the difference of a gun is that its primary use is to kill people. Hunting has always been popular in the US. The bow and arrow has been used to kill animals. But when guns came on the scene it was much easier to use guns. And big caliber guns were and still are used for big game. Target, and skeet shooting is still a popular past time for gun owners.

      There are hundreds of millions of legal guns in the US today, and the percentage of these that are used for mass killings is hundreds or less. We have existing gun control laws that can weed out many of them, but unfortunately congress has not sufficiently funded law enforcement to investigate, and followup on them. There were some thirty thousand gun owners in Los Angeles that were on the list to have their guns taken away from them because they were adjudicated as mentally unstable. Yet, the agencies didn't have the manpower to followup on it in a speedy fashion. They claimed it would take years to do that.


      Does it really matter what kind of a gun that a terrorist or other mass shooter has when their targets don't have any weapons. It takes seconds to speed load a revolver, or an automatic pistol or rifle.

    • bradmasterOCcal profile imageAUTHOR

      Brad Masters 

      12 months ago from Orange County California BSIT BSL JD


      Brad, can I ask what you wanted the FBI to do? They can't arrest someone for being "creepy. " What felony would you have charged him with? Because having a felony conviction is the only thing that would have prevented him from getting an AR-15 legally. That would have taken up to a year unless he cut a deal.


      I am asking them to do their job. They were notified of the posting of him saying that he wanted to be a professional school shooter, They visited the site owner about it, but apparently they never followed through. I say that because now the FBI is saying they don't know if the shooter is the same one that was on the web site. If they had followed through they would have known because they would have interviewed him. If it is not the same person, then we have another possible mass school shooter out there. The government has been spying on all us for years, and they even did it to president Trump. What is the reason for their spying if it isn't to protect us from terrorists and other mass murderers.


      Weapons ownership in FL is almost sacrosanct. Saying he wants to be a "mass shooter" is not a specific threat. He would have had to say, "I want to shoot XYZ." The bar is pretty high for the FBI to arrest you. Local authorities could have done more, maybe.


      He said professional school shooter, and you don't think that warrants investigation?

      I said Investigate, you distract with Arrest. The fact is they didn't even investigate him.


    • lions44 profile image

      CJ Kelly 

      12 months ago from Auburn, WA

      Brad, can I ask what you wanted the FBI to do? They can't arrest someone for being "creepy. " What felony would you have charged him with? Because having a felony conviction is the only thing that would have prevented him from getting an AR-15 legally. That would have taken up to a year unless he cut a deal.

      Weapons ownership in FL is almost sacrosanct. Saying he wants to be a "mass shooter" is not a specific threat. He would have had to say, "I want to shoot XYZ." The bar is pretty high for the FBI to arrest you. Local authorities could have done more, maybe.

    • Valeant profile image


      12 months ago from Syracuse, NY

      Interesting. I published a rebuttal. Perhaps our differences can lead to a string of point-counterpoint articles.


    This website uses cookies

    As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

    For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at:

    Show Details
    HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
    LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
    Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
    AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
    HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
    HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
    Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
    CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
    Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the or domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
    Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
    Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
    Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
    Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
    Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
    Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
    Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
    ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
    Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)