Mass Shooting & Gun Violence | Wisconsin school shooting today (4 victims plus shooter dead, more injured)

[ZZLPHeels]

To be fair, ShotSpotter was highly controversial and its effectiveness was questionable. Shootings actually increased in Durham during the year ShotSpotter was piloted, and something like 90% of ShotSpotter reports couldn’t be confirmed by police when they investigated. Also, many residents thought it led to over-policing in black neighborhoods.

https://www.axios.com/local/raleigh/2024/02/26/shotspotter-effectiveness-durham

Yet for the price it resulted in the police being alerted to shootings that were otherwise not reported, got illegal weapons off of the street (although the DA would dismiss those charges anyways), and in other cities such as Winston-Salem and Fayetteville led to the police discovering gunshot victims sooner and as a result led to those victims being transported to the hospital faster and having a better chance of survival. The arguments against it were simply variations of "ACAB".

 

[EyeballKid]

Yet for the price it resulted in the police being alerted to shootings that were otherwise not reported, got illegal weapons off of the street (although the DA would dismiss those charges anyways), and in other cities such as Winston-Salem and Fayetteville led to the police discovering gunshot victims sooner and as a result led to those victims being transported to the hospital faster and having a better chance of survival. The arguments against it were simply variations of "ACAB".

No…the arguments were that in Durham, it sent police on a lot of wild goose chases and didn’t decrease gun violence.

That’s not “ACAB.”

 

[ZZLPHeels]

No…the arguments were that in Durham, it sent police on a lot of wild goose chases and didn’t decrease gun violence.

That’s not “ACAB.”

You'd think if that were the argument then the police would have been against ShotSpotter. That wasn't the case. The police were all for it, because many of those "wild goose chases" turned out to be actual shootings. Many (but not all) of the arguments against it were because the opponents didn't like the "overpolicing of Black neighborhoods".

Also, expecting ShotSpotter by itself to decrease gun violence is not realistic. ShotSpotter is a tool. There are many tools that have to be used together in order to reduce gun violence. If Shotspotter leads to felons being arrested with firearms (it did), and the DA simply dismisses those charges, that's not on ShotSpotter. ShotSpotter did what it was supposed to do. The DA failed on their end.

In Fayetteville, ShotSpotter was renewed and homicides are down 50% with violent-crime in general at a 10-year low.

https://www.fayettevillenc.gov/Home/Components/News/News/16231/397

 

[farce©]

No…the arguments were that in Durham, it sent police on a lot of wild goose chases and didn’t decrease gun violence.

That’s not “ACAB.”

You are entering the endless bullshit loop. Bo always has to have the last word. The next time he walks away from a disagreement (especially about guns or police misconduct) will be the first time he does so. Don’t waste your time.

 

[EyeballKid]

You'd think if that were the argument then the police would have been against ShotSpotter. That wasn't the case. The police were all for it, because many of those "wild goose chases" turned out to be actual shootings. Many (but not all) of the arguments against it were because the opponents didn't like the "overpolicing of Black neighborhoods".

You'd think if that were the argument then the police would have been against ShotSpotter. That wasn't the case. The police were all for it, because many of those "wild goose chases" turned out to be actual shootings. Many (but not all) of the arguments against it were because the opponents didn't like the "overpolicing of Black neighborhoods".

Also, expecting ShotSpotter by itself to decrease gun violence is not realistic. ShotSpotter is a tool. There are many tools that have to be used together in order to reduce gun violence. If Shotspotter leads to felons being arrested with firearms (it did), and the DA simply dismisses those charges, that's not on ShotSpotter. ShotSpotter did what it was supposed to do. The DA failed on their end.

In Fayetteville, ShotSpotter was renewed and homicides are down 50% with violent-crime in general at a 10-year low.

https://www.fayettevillenc.gov/Home/Components/News/News/16231/397

Charlotte dropped ShotSpotter years ago for the same reasons Durham did. It’s not a proven, cost effective tool. It has shown mixed results in nearly every pilot program.

I’ll not argue this further, because it’s clear you’re going to beat this horse to death.

 

[BlooVooDoo]

True, but Durham is much more progressive than Wake and Orange doesn't have the crime problem that Durham has. Durham also got rid of ShotSpotter despite pleas from the Mayor, police chief, and many residents to keep it. Point being that while the right is vehemently opposed to any new gun safety legislation regardless of how reasonable it might be, some on the left are vehemently opposed to using existing tools and laws to reduce gun crime.

Perhaps a better and simpler explanation might be that a particular DA looks at the available resources and makes a decision to not prosecute relatively minor and common charges (eg shoplifting, public indecency) and focus on more serious offenses (grand theft auto, armed robbery).

 

[ZZLPHeels]

You are entering the endless bullshit loop. Bo always has to have the last word. The next time he walks away from a disagreement (especially about guns or police misconduct) will be the first time he does so. Don’t waste your time.

Ah, my bad. I thought discussions and debates were supposed to be a give and take. A back and forth, if you will. I wasn't aware that the expectation was for one person to talk to themselves. I believe there are diagnoses in the DSM for that condition.

 

[ZZLPHeels]

Perhaps a better and simpler explanation might be that a particular DA looks at the available resources and makes a decision to not prosecute relatively minor and common charges (eg shoplifting, public indecency) and focus on more serious offenses (grand theft auto, armed robbery).

That may be the case, but in a city rife with gun violence, you would think that felons in possession of illegal firearms would warrant prosecuting. After all, if the illegal guns and the felons carrying the illegal guns are off of the street, it stands to reason that people would be safer. Waiting until someone is shot to actually (maybe) put someone behind bars doesn't seem to be working there.

 

[BlooVooDoo]

That may be the case, but in a city rife with gun violence, you would think that felons in possession of illegal firearms would warrant prosecuting. After all, if the illegal guns and the felons carrying the illegal guns are off of the street, it stands to reason that people would be safer. Waiting until someone is shot to actually (maybe) put someone behind bars doesn't seem to be working there.

Are you sure the firearms are illegal? Are they full auto, SBRs, defaced serial numbers? Or is it simple possession of a firearm by a felon? What’s the range of penalties for a Class G felony? A few months to a couple years? How much court (ADA) time is spent putting a non-violent felon in jail for possessing a firearm. I assume they confiscate the firearm, so at least that’s fewer guns on the street.

 

[altmin]

This is one issue that I will sadly admit that I have completely given up on. There is simply no way in our current political and cultural situation that there is ever going to be any kind of significant gun control legislation passed. In fact, not only are (mostly) red states adamantly refusing to look at even mild gun control measures, but in many of these states there are now concealed carry and even open carry laws so civilians can walk around and look and feel tough and safe, like the Wild West. If the cold-blooded murder of 20 kids between the ages of 6 and 7 at Sandy Hook didn't move the needle on this issue then nothing will, and every school shooting since has just proven it. There's always an excuse not to do anything substantive, and it seems clear to me that as a society too many of us have decided that the occasional murder of schoolkids is simply the price we all have to pay for our precious Second Amendment rights to own lots and lots of pew pew pews. And I don't see that changing in my lifetime, unfortunately.

only way it changes is if there is some kind of mass shooting of Congress members or their families and even then not guaranteed. It is so unlikely to happen though, that there is no feasible possibility of it changing.

 

[UNCMSinLS]

Until 1) the Supreme Court composition is changed to have a rational reading of the original Second Amendment or 2) the Second Amendment is repealed or replaced by something rational, gun violence in the country will continue apace and likely worsen. God help us because we're certainly not capable of helping ourselves.

 

[ZZLPHeels]

Are you sure the firearms are illegal? Are they full auto, SBRs, defaced serial numbers? Or is it simple possession of a firearm by a felon? What’s the range of penalties for a Class G felony? A few months to a couple years? How much court (ADA) time is spent putting a non-violent felon in jail for possessing a firearm. I assume they confiscate the firearm, so at least that’s fewer guns on the street.

Possession of firearm by a felon. In many cases those firearms have been reported stolen as well. I'd take placing these people behind bars for a few months to a couple of years versus having them face no consequences at all, particularly when Durham is dealing with a high level of gun violence. As it stands now, felons know that there will be no real consequences to them carrying firearms illegally. If the gun get confiscated, they'll just steal or buy a new one.

 

[ChileG]

No. I'll wait until more facts come out. I saw the shooter's statement published on X (with no community note) but it does need to be verified. If verified, it will support my position. I should have waited before posting this morning. But the way the authorities treated the Nashville shooter's manifesto does not give me confidence it will be verified anytime soon.

So your position is that it will fade from the news, right?
Well, it hasn’t yet. Are you going to claim victory in a week or two when it does fade? Is that what you are holding out for?

 

[EyeballKid]

You'd think if that were the argument then the police would have been against ShotSpotter. That wasn't the case. The police were all for it, because many of those "wild goose chases" turned out to be actual shootings. Many (but not all) of the arguments against it were because the opponents didn't like the "overpolicing of Black neighborhoods".

Also, expecting ShotSpotter by itself to decrease gun violence is not realistic. ShotSpotter is a tool. There are many tools that have to be used together in order to reduce gun violence. If Shotspotter leads to felons being arrested with firearms (it did), and the DA simply dismisses those charges, that's not on ShotSpotter. ShotSpotter did what it was supposed to do. The DA failed on their end.

In Fayetteville, ShotSpotter was renewed and homicides are down 50% with violent-crime in general at a 10-year low.

https://www.fayettevillenc.gov/Home/Components/News/News/16231/397

And Winston Salem just ended/didn’t renew their contract with ShotSpotter after 3 years of mixed results.

Winston-Salem police will no longer use ShotSpotter

WINSTON-SALEM, N.C. (WGHP) — The Winston-Salem Police Department will not renew its grant to fund ShotSpotter, which is the technology designed to pick up gunshots and quickly alert law enfor…

myfox8.com

 

[Ramrouser]

Well it does seem like the authorities could verify the shooter's written statement/manifesto by now since they have access to her computer and electronic devices. The publisher of the document indicated in X that If we hear nothing from them this week then it is likely that it is a genuine document and they are likely trying to bury it during Christmas week. If it is a fake, then we'll know soon.

 

[ZZLPHeels]

And Winston Salem just ended/didn’t renew their contract with ShotSpotter after 3 years of mixed results.

Winston-Salem police will no longer use ShotSpotter

WINSTON-SALEM, N.C. (WGHP) — The Winston-Salem Police Department will not renew its grant to fund ShotSpotter, which is the technology designed to pick up gunshots and quickly alert law enfor…

myfox8.com

Interesting. Quite the opposite from Durham, where DPD was all for keeping it.

 

[EyeballKid]

Interesting. Quite the opposite from Durham, where DPD was all for keeping it.

I can’t speak to DPD’s rationale. But I can understand why the city council voted against renewing ShotSpotter. The data shows mixed results in Durham, just as in Winston and Charlotte and Chicago and other cities. It didn’t decrease gun crime in Durham during its usage, and it resulted in a lot of wild goose chases, so it wasn’t a particularly cost-effective tool as implemented.

Has nothing to do with progressives claiming “ACAB.”

 

[ZZLPHeels]

I can’t speak to DPD’s rationale. But I can understand why the city council voted against renewing ShotSpotter. The data shows mixed results in Durham, just as in Winston and Charlotte and Chicago and other cities. It didn’t decrease gun crime in Durham during its usage, and it resulted in a lot of wild goose chases, so it wasn’t a particularly cost-effective tool as implemented.

Has nothing to do with progressives claiming “ACAB.”

As I stated earlier, ShotSpotter by itself is not going to decrease gun crime. If used effectively, in combination with existing resources, it can. But if the DA isn’t going to pursue charges against people with illegal guns, or if the police force is so understaffed that it can’t respond to activations appropriately, it is not going to work. Durham PD liked it, Winston-Salem didn’t, Fayetteville has credited it with helping decrease gun crime, Charlotte did not. It is not a one size fits all solution.

 

[gtyellowjacket]

only way it changes is if there is some kind of mass shooting of Congress members or their families and even then not guaranteed. It is so unlikely to happen though, that there is no feasible possibility of it changing.

There was a mass shooting of congressmen at that softball practice several years back. The number two Republican almost died. Nothing happened.

 

[Zoo_View]

This is one issue that I will sadly admit that I have completely given up on. There is simply no way in our current political and cultural situation that there is ever going to be any kind of significant gun control legislation passed. In fact, not only are (mostly) red states adamantly refusing to look at even mild gun control measures, but in many of these states there are now concealed carry and even open carry laws so civilians can walk around and look and feel tough and safe, like the Wild West. If the cold-blooded murder of 20 kids between the ages of 6 and 7 at Sandy Hook didn't move the needle on this issue then nothing will, and every school shooting since has just proven it. There's always an excuse not to do anything substantive, and it seems clear to me that as a society too many of us have decided that the occasional murder of schoolkids is simply the price we all have to pay for our precious Second Amendment rights to own lots and lots of pew pew pews. And I don't see that changing in my lifetime, unfortunately.

Appreciate the post and agree with most of it.

Regarding the Wild West, frontier towns such as Tombstone, Deadwood, Dodge City, etc. had gun control laws/ordinances prohibiting carrying guns in public. Local merchants and town founding fathers wanted quiet, peaceful communities.