"To End Mass Shootings," Henry Giroux writes at TruthOut, "We Need to Change the Deeper Structure of Life in the U.S." The Buffalo and Uvalde shootings "represent the end points of a culture awash in guns and violence, a society that nourishes and rewards the gun industries, and values the accumulation of profits over human needs." Thus we must pursue solutions well beyond the number/kinds of guns we can get in America. And valuing "the accumulation of profits over human needs" is not "just human nature," or we wouldn't have lived in a considerably different America between roughly 1932 and 1980.
Folks are wondering why police didn't rush into the building during the Uvalde, TX school shooting, and what we find out in time might be worse than what we know right now. But here's what I know for sure: right-wingers have been selling "more cops" as the solution to virtually every law-and-order issue for decades, but "more cops" didn't save the lives of 19 kids in Uvalde, so we can surely understand the anger of parents whose children bled out before any police officers made a difference that day. How about we end the myth of the "good guy with a gun," then? And how about the next couple dozen cop-show producers give us some help with that?
Guess what? The right wing's notion of controlling school shootings by "arming teachers" is also a terrible idea! Among the problems: people shoot their guns accidentally all the time, students could get their hands on the guns, even the best shooters hit their targets less than once in five tries, police might mistake a teacher shooting at a school shooter for the school shooter, and anyway if police aren't going to lay their lives on the line why should we expect teachers to do it? Also too, we demand "more training" of folks (here teachers, elsewhere cops) in all kinds of things that aren't directly related to their field as if folks' minds are really all that flexible. It's getting to the point where I'm starting to think "more training" really means "I don't want to work to solve real problems."
Jonathan Chait at New York magazine describes "The Conservative Playbook for Deflecting Anger After Mass Shootings," and though I wouldn't call it a "conservative" playbook -- a right-wing playbook, a reactionary playbook, an asshole's playbook -- it is pretty much a masterclass in evil argument! Call your opponents "political" when your own worldview is political, say that because a policy doesn't do everything nobody should ever do anything, and then go find "causes" of mass shootings that your opponents won't fight, like "critical race theory" as Sen. Johnson did the other day. Of course, bad arguments keep winning because Democrats won't fight for good arguments.
And on cue: Sen. Bill Cassidy (E-LA) suggests we ought to keep AR-15s around because some people use them to kill feral pigs. Many questions would ensue, chief among them is an AR-15 really the only way to kill a feral pig? Even so, his objection would be moot under Thom Hartmann's proposal, the one I've supported for a couple of years now -- the AR-15 wouldn't be illegal under the Hartmann plan, but you'd have to jump through more administrative hoops to get one, which presumably someone who needed it to kill feral pigs could do. If they need it.
Finally, after a week of ballot-counting issues, Jamie McLeod-Skinner has bested Rep. Kurt Schrader in the Oregon 5th House district Democratic primary by a pretty damn decisive 13-point margin. Finally politicians are paying the price for defying the will of the people -- in Mr. Schrader's case, for opposing Medicare drug price negotiation. You know what would be even better? If Republicans started paying the price for opposing the will of the people! Of course, you need fewer Democrats like Kurt Schrader, and more Democrats like Jamie McLeod-Skinner, to be able to do that, and the party establishment tends to enable the former and destroy the latter.