Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
USA Shootings (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter randall146
- Start date
identikit
Footballguy
General Malaise
Footballguy
I don't fault you for having hope. I wish I still did but like the sagacious @krista4 said, if the mass murder of 5 and 6 year old children at Sandy Hook didn't author a sea change on gun control with a Dem as Pres, then my hope for any change in my lifetime has been permanently destroyed.
OrtonToOlsen
Footballguy
Trump laughs off suggestion to shoot immigrants.
https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-us-canada-48218887/shoot-them-trump-laughs-off-supporter-s-migrant-comment
https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-us-canada-48218887/shoot-them-trump-laughs-off-supporter-s-migrant-comment
OrtonToOlsen
Footballguy
John Bender
Footballguy
It would allow me to give him some props and probably win some votes if he held one of those special pressers during prime time and denounced this bull####. Problem is, he's not smart or surrounded by smart people
OrtonToOlsen
Footballguy
Max Power
Footballguy
msommer
Footballguy
rockaction
Footballguy
I find it highly ironic that a lot of people -- not all -- discuss the normative psychological influence of a president on a gunman acting alone but refuse to discuss mass culture or normative influence by the culture writ large when it comes to sex and violence.
Just noticing it in these threads and others -- we've got a subtle blame game going on one way and not in any other direction that it should be going if -- and that's a big if -- we accept the normative psychological influences of authority and stimulus.
Just noticing it in these threads and others -- we've got a subtle blame game going on one way and not in any other direction that it should be going if -- and that's a big if -- we accept the normative psychological influences of authority and stimulus.
Last edited by a moderator:
John Bender
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
6/9 of the victims were minorities. At least one of the other 3 seems to be a relative. So.
rockaction
Footballguy
I think every time this happens, gun control is brought up and aside from a select few, minds aren't changed. But as someone who doesn't participate in them, I can pretty much be assured that within seven posts of the OP, it's about guns.
Last edited by a moderator:
badmojo1006
Footballguy
There have been 249 mass shootings in the US this year. There never seems to be a 24 hour period where a shooting has not occured
Dayton was 1 this morning. I really dont care, was just surprised Joe and co aren't in here limiting the discussion like usual.
John Bender
Footballguy
Believe me, I used to feel the same as you on that front (waiting a little time before discussing the gun control issue) but it's just gotten out of hand at this point. A board moratorium is ridiculous.
Man In The Box
Footballguy
News networks have to split the screen to cover them all. I don’t think it’s time for the discussion yet though. Maybe when we get to the point where there’s like 8 going on simultaneously and we can have a channel like the Directv game mix to cover them all. Then maybe real change will happen.
Last edited by a moderator:
Again don't worry your pretty little head. It will be like all other shootings and completely forgotten. So your group can do whatever and satisfy that small ego by caring high powered weapons into a Wal Mart
Last edited by a moderator:
msommer
Footballguy
ShamrockPride
Footballguy
Good to know they're seeking the death penalty on El Paso guy. He can sit warm and cozy in his cell on death row until he's 50.
identikit
Footballguy
Sammy3469
Footballguy
I guess he’s saving the rationalization of white nationalist terrorism with false equivalence on national television for tomorrow
OrtonToOlsen
Footballguy
They sure do take care of things in Texas.
https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2019-08-04/nra-celebrated-looser-texas-gun-laws-before-el-paso-shooting
https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2019-08-04/nra-celebrated-looser-texas-gun-laws-before-el-paso-shooting
msommer
Footballguy
MSNBC talking heads speculated that motive could be a domestic dispute. My guess is that they found out about his plan and tried to stop him
Sheriff Bart
Footballguy
He tweeted
What else could you possibly want him to do? It's not like he's in charge of anything.
ren hoek
Footballguy
It's hard to imagine that banning guns wouldn't restrict the availability to some mass shooters. In practice though, I think it'd be yet another legal framework that would be disproportionately enforced against black people. It'd be another pipeline into the carceral state. Like drug laws, I think it would just move guns to black markets instead of open ones.
There's an alarming trend of white supremacy not just among violent shooters, but also in law enforcement and military services. They're the ones that would be enforcing these laws. It's been there beneath the surface for a long time now, though it's clearly reaching a boiling point now. It basically takes an act of Christ to actually hold a police officer accountable for killing a black man. They're functionally invincible against legal repercussions. The absolute worst case scenario for Pantaleo for killing Eric Garner is not prison time, but losing his job.
But I think this is more symptomatic of a culture in decay than anything else. I don't like that the first inclination whenever these killings happen is toward addressing the 'how,' but not the 'why'? I don't like that the first inclination is toward taking people's rights away, and handing more power to the US police state. Why do shooters want to kill scores of innocent people? I don't think people come to this point without feeling dispossessed and isolated; I don't want to make them out to be the victims, but I'd imagine there's a strong correlation between a broken childhood, exposure to the military, and mass shooters.
We've had generally free access to guns for over a century. What changed between then and now? If it was as simple as the prevalence of guns, this wouldn't be a fairly recent development.
The only thing I can think of is that we've drifted away from an honest value system (religion, family, whatever- the sense of community is gone) and replaced it with a degenerate, materialistic portrait of the world. So much of popular culture is animated by superficial garbage and insecurity rather than a real sense of humanity. A lot of it is guided by the military industrial complex too. It colors our perception of war and violence. A lot of it is the aftermath of living in a system where the rich prosper and everyone else gets ####ed over and out. It's the inevitable byproduct of living in a corporate war state instead of a conscious and open society.
By David Swanson's count, 35% of mass shooters are military-trained veterans of some kind. When we kill and maim innocent people abroad, it hardly registers a blip. We export death and destruction all over the world, not only in our own names, but by the duress of a multi-trillion dollar defense industry. We back violent savages in other people's lands. But very few want to correlate spending gazillions of dollars on violence with an upswell in violence back home.
The opposition to this form of violence and outpouring of empathy when it happens at home, but not when we do it abroad, is a big blind spot. There's a huge inconsistency between wanting to disarm the citizenry, and militarizing the #### out of our security services and the rest of the world. We don't get to have a violent empire abroad and a peaceful society at home. It can not and will not happen until people reckon with the real cost of the warfare state, and the cultural belief system that comes with it.
There's an alarming trend of white supremacy not just among violent shooters, but also in law enforcement and military services. They're the ones that would be enforcing these laws. It's been there beneath the surface for a long time now, though it's clearly reaching a boiling point now. It basically takes an act of Christ to actually hold a police officer accountable for killing a black man. They're functionally invincible against legal repercussions. The absolute worst case scenario for Pantaleo for killing Eric Garner is not prison time, but losing his job.
But I think this is more symptomatic of a culture in decay than anything else. I don't like that the first inclination whenever these killings happen is toward addressing the 'how,' but not the 'why'? I don't like that the first inclination is toward taking people's rights away, and handing more power to the US police state. Why do shooters want to kill scores of innocent people? I don't think people come to this point without feeling dispossessed and isolated; I don't want to make them out to be the victims, but I'd imagine there's a strong correlation between a broken childhood, exposure to the military, and mass shooters.
We've had generally free access to guns for over a century. What changed between then and now? If it was as simple as the prevalence of guns, this wouldn't be a fairly recent development.
The only thing I can think of is that we've drifted away from an honest value system (religion, family, whatever- the sense of community is gone) and replaced it with a degenerate, materialistic portrait of the world. So much of popular culture is animated by superficial garbage and insecurity rather than a real sense of humanity. A lot of it is guided by the military industrial complex too. It colors our perception of war and violence. A lot of it is the aftermath of living in a system where the rich prosper and everyone else gets ####ed over and out. It's the inevitable byproduct of living in a corporate war state instead of a conscious and open society.
By David Swanson's count, 35% of mass shooters are military-trained veterans of some kind. When we kill and maim innocent people abroad, it hardly registers a blip. We export death and destruction all over the world, not only in our own names, but by the duress of a multi-trillion dollar defense industry. We back violent savages in other people's lands. But very few want to correlate spending gazillions of dollars on violence with an upswell in violence back home.
The opposition to this form of violence and outpouring of empathy when it happens at home, but not when we do it abroad, is a big blind spot. There's a huge inconsistency between wanting to disarm the citizenry, and militarizing the #### out of our security services and the rest of the world. We don't get to have a violent empire abroad and a peaceful society at home. It can not and will not happen until people reckon with the real cost of the warfare state, and the cultural belief system that comes with it.
KCitons
Footballguy
I've mentioned that many cities and states have passed gun control measures. Many here have said that nothing is happening and that the NRA is standing in the way. It begs the question, if a majority of the population wants more gun regulation, why aren't more states doing this? How does Texas pass these laws if the majority of Texans want stricter gun regulation.
Since the shooting at Marjory Stoneman DouglasHigh School, the following laws have been changed:
Florida passed the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School Public Safety Act in the wake of the shooting. It raised the age to purchase guns to 21 from 18, banned people legally judged “mentally defective” from buying a gun, and set up a system for law enforcement to take guns from people deemed a threat to themselves or others. The law also banned bump stocks, used in the 2017 mass shooting in Las Vegas. Bump stocks make semi-automatic weapons function like automatic guns so that they fire without the need to repeatedly press the trigger.
The federal government later effectively banned bump stocks nationwide, with a regulation signed by acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker requiring most gun owners to destroy or turn in the devices by March 26.
Washington State voters approved Initiative 1639 in the November 2018 elections. As the Seattle Times reported, the new law requires anyone buying a semi-automatic rifle to be 21, pass a beefed-up background check, have taken a mandatory training class, and wait 10 business days to get the gun. It also allows gun owners to be charged with “community endangerment” if guns are not locked up and a child or someone not allowed to have them commits a crime with them or brandishes them in public.
Vermont enacted new laws limiting gun sales to people under 21, capping gun magazine sizes, and restricting person-to-person gun transfers without background checks.
New Jersey passed a series of gun legislation banning armor-piercing ammunition, limiting magazine sizes to 10 rounds, allowing guns to be temporarily seized if the owner is deemed dangerous, requiring background checks for private gun sales, and funding a gun violence research center at Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey.
California passed laws banning people convicted of domestic violence and people put on involuntary court psychiatric holds twice in a year from owning guns. The state also now requires that gun buyers be 21. Finally, it mandated training before people could receive concealed-carry permits.
Louisiana created a mechanism to seize guns from domestic abusers who are banned from having them. The state also allowed guns up to the property lines of schools and colleges, removed a training requirement before bringing guns into houses of worship, and legalized switchblades.
New York earlier this year passed a series of new gun laws, restricting guns in schools (including effectively banning teachers from carrying weapons on the job), providing funding for local gun buy-back programs, and allowing court orders that ban at-risk people from having guns. It also allowed longer waiting periods after inconclusive pre-purchase background checks.
In total, 11 states passed laws in 2018 that restrict gun access to people linked to domestic violence, and eight states, plus the District of Columbia, created ways to temporarily keep guns from dangerous or “at risk” people, according to data from the Giffords Law Center, a gun control advocacy group.
New gun control laws passed in 2018
Since the shooting at Marjory Stoneman DouglasHigh School, the following laws have been changed:
Florida passed the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School Public Safety Act in the wake of the shooting. It raised the age to purchase guns to 21 from 18, banned people legally judged “mentally defective” from buying a gun, and set up a system for law enforcement to take guns from people deemed a threat to themselves or others. The law also banned bump stocks, used in the 2017 mass shooting in Las Vegas. Bump stocks make semi-automatic weapons function like automatic guns so that they fire without the need to repeatedly press the trigger.
The federal government later effectively banned bump stocks nationwide, with a regulation signed by acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker requiring most gun owners to destroy or turn in the devices by March 26.
Washington State voters approved Initiative 1639 in the November 2018 elections. As the Seattle Times reported, the new law requires anyone buying a semi-automatic rifle to be 21, pass a beefed-up background check, have taken a mandatory training class, and wait 10 business days to get the gun. It also allows gun owners to be charged with “community endangerment” if guns are not locked up and a child or someone not allowed to have them commits a crime with them or brandishes them in public.
Vermont enacted new laws limiting gun sales to people under 21, capping gun magazine sizes, and restricting person-to-person gun transfers without background checks.
New Jersey passed a series of gun legislation banning armor-piercing ammunition, limiting magazine sizes to 10 rounds, allowing guns to be temporarily seized if the owner is deemed dangerous, requiring background checks for private gun sales, and funding a gun violence research center at Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey.
California passed laws banning people convicted of domestic violence and people put on involuntary court psychiatric holds twice in a year from owning guns. The state also now requires that gun buyers be 21. Finally, it mandated training before people could receive concealed-carry permits.
Louisiana created a mechanism to seize guns from domestic abusers who are banned from having them. The state also allowed guns up to the property lines of schools and colleges, removed a training requirement before bringing guns into houses of worship, and legalized switchblades.
New York earlier this year passed a series of new gun laws, restricting guns in schools (including effectively banning teachers from carrying weapons on the job), providing funding for local gun buy-back programs, and allowing court orders that ban at-risk people from having guns. It also allowed longer waiting periods after inconclusive pre-purchase background checks.
In total, 11 states passed laws in 2018 that restrict gun access to people linked to domestic violence, and eight states, plus the District of Columbia, created ways to temporarily keep guns from dangerous or “at risk” people, according to data from the Giffords Law Center, a gun control advocacy group.
identikit
Footballguy
McBokonon
Footballguy
rockaction
Footballguy
I vehemently disagree with a lot of your postings, but am in full agreement with most of the actualities of what you post here. The consequences of new restrictions on guns will simply open other markets, with the cost of obtaining then often as high as the price as being on their receiving end.
As far as the corrosion of values goes, this is a paleolibertarian argument long argued by many who skirt along the line between classical liberalism properly understood and anarchy as also properly understood as a legitimate political response to the bigness of things. There is a chicken and egg problem here, and that is whether or not the institutions have caused the rot among the populace, or whether the spiritual rot endemic to our populace is making the institutions bigger. Often anarchists argue the former, classical liberals the latter. Per each policy, one can probably take it on a case-by-case basis, IMO, but the death of God in the Western World cannot be over-exaggerated as the 20th Century's wars taught us.
Anyway, the true cost of the welfare state is huge, the costs of illegal immigration or undocumented immigrants are huge and those two things need to be addressed as well. But the true costs are not so easily ascertainable, nor a dollar figure placed. Instead we lurch forward, unsteadily, doing a random walk towards our kingdom.
Last edited by a moderator:
sho nuff
Footballguy
They shouldn't. This is a political message board..these shootings appear to be politically motivated.
And there is zero reason to limit discussion. People appear to be respectful of those who have passed.
Some of us have had enough of the senseless violence and want to discuss it. That is reasonable.
Last edited by a moderator:
badmojo1006
Footballguy
Stealthycat
Footballguy
guns do not mass kill - people do
"easy" .... define easy ? again, I submit a shotgun will do similar damage as would having 8 handguns in a bag etc. Or a truck filled with fertilizer or gasoline etc
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
There are restrictions on buying fertilizer now iirc.
Oswald murdered a president with a Carcano 52mm carbine and that could have started a nuclear war, and he ordered it from a catalog. I don’t know why people make this argument because the use/right value vs potential magnitude of damage scale just results in an argument for banning or severely restricting the materials & weapons like you’ve described.
Last edited by a moderator:
Stealthycat
Footballguy
who EVER has said that ?
nobody
it depends on the how doesn't it ?
sure you can - its simply not legal. That's where laws do NOT bind people, never has, never will. We have laws that says don't kill people. Why isn't that enough ?
nobody has said that have they ? that's why its odd - your mind is saying it, but literally nobody here is
nobody here on either side wants more murders. One side thinks more laws and rules and banning things will matter. One side thinks that stopping the people who want to do these things matter.
DJackson10
Footballguy
These attacks were Brought to you by NRA - National Rifle Association of America WHERE WE PAY OFF YOUR POLITICIANS TO VOTE IN OUR FAVOR. All while sending you THE BS THE GOVERMENT WILL TAKE YOUR GUNS AWAY ALL BECAUSE WE'RE GREEDY IGNORANT GARBAGE PEOPLE WHO MAKE $$$$$ OFF MASS SHOOtiNGS. Truth is IF THE GOVERMENT WANTED TOO THEY HAVE ALREADY DONE SO
Where were all the open carry people in Texas? Thats right they became cowards. This is why I love when people say I they carry to protect from this but 95% of them coward when put into the situation they brag about. This is why I call these people nothing more then people who need to boost their egos and self importance.
We don't just need gun reform in this country we need to get Lobbyist and Citizens United out of politics. The Sooner we do that then these Government officials will start working for us. They don't work for you right now unless you got the $$$ to line their pockets #BanCitizensUnited #OutlawLobbyist
Aurora: White man
Sandy Hook: White man
Charleston: White man
Sutherland Springs: White man
Vegas: White man
Parkland: White man
Thousand Oaks: White man
Pittsburgh: White man
El Paso: White man
Dayton: White man
Its not Mentally Ill People
It’s #WhiteSupremacistTerrorism.
Where were all the open carry people in Texas? Thats right they became cowards. This is why I love when people say I they carry to protect from this but 95% of them coward when put into the situation they brag about. This is why I call these people nothing more then people who need to boost their egos and self importance.
We don't just need gun reform in this country we need to get Lobbyist and Citizens United out of politics. The Sooner we do that then these Government officials will start working for us. They don't work for you right now unless you got the $$$ to line their pockets #BanCitizensUnited #OutlawLobbyist
Aurora: White man
Sandy Hook: White man
Charleston: White man
Sutherland Springs: White man
Vegas: White man
Parkland: White man
Thousand Oaks: White man
Pittsburgh: White man
El Paso: White man
Dayton: White man
Its not Mentally Ill People
It’s #WhiteSupremacistTerrorism.
Stealthycat
Footballguy
nobody ever said laws were 100% effective
if you could pass a law today that would save 10,000 lives in 2020 .... but would also have social impacts to 50 million people would you do it ? pretty simple answer - do it, right ?
Stealthycat
Footballguy
Stealthycat
Footballguy
I'm guessing Wal-Mart is already in the process of evaluating their security measures and armed guards are likely in the future.
since my son's high schools got armed guards, my pretty little head worries much less now
Juxtatarot
Footballguy
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
The SC ruled that handguns are protected, so I don't know why the rhetoric is they are coming for all guns. Actually, yes I do.
DJackson10
Footballguy
Stealthycat
Footballguy
honest answer please - if El Paso and Dayton were both done with automatic shotguns, would you be asking for a ban / restrictions on automatic shotguns ?
Stealthycat
Footballguy
how would you answer ?
because that's really what the anti-gun side suggests .... pass a law/rule impacts 20 million people negatively, to stop 25 wackos every year ...... and the anti-gun side says heck yes, that's reasonable
when applying SAME logic and reason to other social issues why can't we get the same answer ?
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
You know this is not possible to stop murderers. Are you seriously posting that a decrease in deaths isn't good enough, you have to have 0 deaths?
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
I’m not sure what I’m arguing for or if I’m arguing for anything, I’m just saying the very point you're making leads to a conclusion of yes they should be banned.
If this was 1889 people would be pointing out the killing being done by the KKK and similar groups with Winchesters and Remingtons and Colts.
My problem is I view myself as a Constitutionalist, but the 2nd Amendment is horribly written and I am absolutely dead set positive the Founders would be sickened by this result. I wish the patriot in you would acknowledge that.
Last edited by a moderator:
DJackson10
Footballguy
Get rid of lobbyist and Citizens united who send $$$$$ to the congress me and women. Make them run their own campaigns with money from the people they represent not these big businesses and Wall Street. Congress doesn't work for us they work for those who line their pockets. Make it illegal for these people to accept money from big Pharm, Big business, Oil companies, NRA etc. Make it corruption, any congress person seen taking money from them loses their seat immediately and spends a minimum of 15 yrs in prison. make it treason as well.
Until we do that no laws we make will do a dam thing.
Similar threads
