Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Mass Shootings Thread


Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, belljr said:

Let's start with 9/11 and work backwards...

Do you support the patriot act?

I don't even remember all that was the Patriot Act - which parts are you wanting to discuss? Counterterroristm ? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, parasaurolophus said:

It has now been removed, but gawain quoted it above. 

Reporting on a mass shooting and not mentioning the race of the shooter(which is totally fine and when reporting a tragedy like this race should be omitted), but making sure to bring up a past shooting and specifically mentioning the race was an obvious move.  

 

I mean they did pretty much out his race by saying he was a former NFL cornerback

  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, KarmaPolice said:

1.  They have been used in high profile mass shootings

"they" are used in 2% of all murders. "high profile" means media reports on it - don't let them control your mind on what to believe and what not

2.  They can be targeted, unlike handguns

anything can be targeted

3.  They don't believe they have a use outside of collecting and sport.  

I took an AR15 varmint hunting in the past few weeks and they're a popular home defense gun

4.  They can be targeted and gun owners are still left with guns (in the off chance an actual ban would happen - i doubt it).

we can be stripped down to muzzleloaders and I guess technically we still have guns huh ? :( 

 

I watched Biden ...

Obama's EO's on guns did nothing to stop murders. Biden's EO on guns will do nothing to stop murders.

but they'll say "well, nobody is using bump stocks and arm braces to commit murders" ......... and they're right ..... they're using something else, and so it'll be more bans, more restrictions ... and it will never even because the core problem isn't being addressed

 

 

Biden didn't once mention cracking down on violent people - its almost like he doesn't care that violent people roam around. Almost like he's protecting them. its fascinating to watch the ignorance 

  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Stealthycat said:

 

I watched Biden ...

Obama's EO's on guns did nothing to stop murders. Biden's EO on guns will do nothing to stop murders.

but they'll say "well, nobody is using bump stocks and arm braces to commit murders" ......... and they're right ..... they're using something else, and so it'll be more bans, more restrictions ... and it will never even because the core problem isn't being addressed

 

 

Biden didn't once mention cracking down on violent people - its almost like he doesn't care that violent people roam around. Almost like he's protecting them. its fascinating to watch the ignorance 

What would be a good start to having decent conversations would not to resort to claiming that people don't care about the topics, deaths, or are protecting violent people.   People really disagree with you around here, but I don't think anybody has accused you of not caring about the school kids getting killed.   

As to your replies to my 4 things (doesn't show up because you wrote in my quote.  

1.  I didn't say anything about %s.  I said they have been used in high profile shootings (and some of the deadliest).  So that part was true.  

2.   Maybe, but addressing ARs is something that could be done today.  Unless you are disagreeing with what has been posted, it would take a ton and probably a miracle to have anything done to handguns.   So maybe my wording wasn't spot on, but that statement is basically true too.  

3.   They ARE used for hunting and home defense, but do they HAVE to be used for that?  Example - if all the ARs disappeared tomorrow, you would still be able to hunt and defend your home, correct?  I don't think it's a compelling argument to say that you prefer to use it.   

4.  Same as the above.  You still have guns to defend and hunt.   Your right to arms has not been taken from you.  

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, KarmaPolice said:

but I don't think anybody has accused you of not caring about the school kids getting killed.   

on a blue collar American's level I agree

but on a politician level .... I disagree

and I say that because time and time again the core problem is not being addressed and I'll continue to say that a million times ......... we've had hundreds of laws and restrictions and rules and none of them has worked. So, we add more laws, restriction and rules hoping one of them will work? it makes zero sense

I mean look a today - in the last 20 years how many AR platform pistols have been used that had an arm brace. 1 ? and they're passing that restriction in the name of saving lives?

that's weak and pathetic - just like the bump stock ban - and it has zero to do with saving lives

59 minutes ago, KarmaPolice said:

1.  I didn't say anything about %s.  I said they have been used in high profile shootings (and some of the deadliest).  So that part was true.  

so its a intention misdirection - anybody who knows the facts knows it is

2.   Maybe, but addressing ARs is something that could be done today.  Unless you are disagreeing with what has been posted, it would take a ton and probably a miracle to have anything done to handguns.   So maybe my wording wasn't spot on, but that statement is basically true too.  

fantastic - so people just continue murdering with handguns and nothing changes. Big win :( 

3.   They ARE used for hunting and home defense, but do they HAVE to be used for that?  Example - if all the ARs disappeared tomorrow, you would still be able to hunt and defend your home, correct?  I don't think it's a compelling argument to say that you prefer to use it.   

you don't have to have a car that drives more than 20 mph .... you could still drive anywhere you wanted and look at all the lives we'd "save" ?    see, that's where "common sense" laws come in ......... we don't need to restrict auto's to 20 mph if everyone drove safe would we ?

4.  Same as the above.  You still have guns to defend and hunt.   Your right to arms has not been taken from you.

and this is the true goal of anti-gunner

the Fed Govt controlling everyone all the time with no freedoms left

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, STEADYMOBBIN 22 said:

At this point they can ban ARs if it will make the uneducated masses feel like they did something. I think they’re a ####ty platform anyway. 
 

they'll also take your AK47's, any guns with a detachable magazine, anything semi-auto ......... they're not going to 'just take' ........... its not, and they know it, and we know it .... they just don't say it

  • Like 1
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, KarmaPolice said:

"the people are the problem" 

 What specifically is being suggested as far as doing something about the above phrase that I see repeated?  Specifically.  

 

give me the pen and executive power

  • the Boulder shooter would be dead today - he's 100% guilty and I'd make sure he wasn't going to waste anymore taxpayer dollars
  • I'd make sure the Federal Govt prosecuted anyone lying on a background check - they don't do anything right now
  • I'd make it easier for law abiding people to get guns - and I'd encourage stand your grand laws in all states (including training etc, people knowing their weapons) Citizens are the first responders, they are 99% trustworthy. TRUST THEM
  • I'd get into schools with safety training and showing kids a better understanding of guns
  • Mentally ill people and their sealed records go - and juvenile too. Ya'll want gun owners to give up rights, lets take privacy right, deal? That way everyone knows who the crazies are, right ?
  • I'm in favor of Red Flag laws IF DONE RIGHT

Remember, only a few hundreds people every year out of 300 million go wacko and mass kill. lets not punish the 99.9 % - lets stop the 0.1 % and you know what ?  You're not stopping drunk drivers, drug and driving, text and driving ........ those are acceptable things in order to HAVE those things

You're not stopping murderers either, but common sense laws we have already, we don't need more

 

  • Like 1
  • Love 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Stealthycat said:

they'll also take your AK47's, any guns with a detachable magazine, anything semi-auto ......... they're not going to 'just take' ........... its not, and they know it, and we know it .... they just don't say it

I know. I was saying it with tongue-in-cheek. 
 

I am pro second amendment through and through
 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, the moops said:

People really have these? What does one do with an AK 47?

Honest question, don’t you think it would behoove you to get knowledgeable on these things before speaking out against them?

 

Why wouldn’t you need an AK-47? What does an AK-47 mean to you when you hear those four letters and numbers put together?

 

To answer your question it’s pretty much an indestructible gun. All guns shoot bullets, some guns are better at it than others at different things. They’re very similar to cars except far less dangerous.

Edited by STEADYMOBBIN 22
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Stealthycat said:

give me the pen and executive power

  • the Boulder shooter would be dead today - he's 100% guilty and I'd make sure he wasn't going to waste anymore taxpayer dollars
  • I'd make sure the Federal Govt prosecuted anyone lying on a background check - they don't do anything right now
  • I'd make it easier for law abiding people to get guns - and I'd encourage stand your grand laws in all states (including training etc, people knowing their weapons) Citizens are the first responders, they are 99% trustworthy. TRUST THEM
  • I'd get into schools with safety training and showing kids a better understanding of guns
  • Mentally ill people and their sealed records go - and juvenile too. Ya'll want gun owners to give up rights, lets take privacy right, deal? That way everyone knows who the crazies are, right ?
  • I'm in favor of Red Flag laws IF DONE RIGHT

Remember, only a few hundreds people every year out of 300 million go wacko and mass kill. lets not punish the 99.9 % - lets stop the 0.1 % and you know what ?  You're not stopping drunk drivers, drug and driving, text and driving ........ those are acceptable things in order to HAVE those things

You're not stopping murderers either, but common sense laws we have already, we don't need more

 

Yes yes yes YES!!!!

  • Like 1
  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, STEADYMOBBIN 22 said:

Honest question, don’t you think it would behoove you to get knowledgeable on these things before speaking out against them?

 

Why wouldn’t you need an AK-47? What does an AK-47 mean to you when you hear those four letters and numbers put together?

 

To answer your question it’s pretty much an indestructible gun. All guns shoot bullets, some guns are better at it than others at different things. They’re very similar to cars except far less dangerous.

I'm not speaking out against them. I just thought AK 47's were things you would see in Red Dawn or some ####. I haven't expressed much opinion on guns actually 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, the moops said:

People really have these? What does one do with an AK 47?

uh ... hunt with it ? self defend with it ?

do you know an AK47 IS ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, the moops said:

I'm not speaking out against them. I just thought AK 47's were things you would see in Red Dawn or some ####. I haven't expressed much opinion on guns actually 

and that's why CNN and liberals are so powerful in their attacks

AR15's, AK47's, bad bad scary weapons of war !!!

 

they're not - they're simply different looking semi-auto guns of different calibers and I suspect they KNOW it ......... they simply have a political agenda and they'll twist the truths to get it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Stealthycat said:

and that's why CNN and liberals are so powerful in their attacks

 

I don't watch CNN and haven't gotten any info about AK47's other than my watching of 1980's action movies

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Stealthycat said:

and that's why CNN and liberals are so powerful in their attacks

AR15's, AK47's, bad bad scary weapons of war !!!

 

they're not - they're simply different looking semi-auto guns of different calibers and I suspect they KNOW it ......... they simply have a political agenda and they'll twist the truths to get it

This is exactly why a conversation with you goes no where.  Not because I don’t believe in your right to have and opinion, you certainly have that right, but because you can’t see that the exact opposite of your statement above is true too.  You are acting exactly as you rail against just with the opposite viewpoint. Thus the conversation or discussion goes no where.  It can only go in the direction you want it to. To your view of “common sense”.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, GordonGekko said:

 

I posited this to someone else in the thread earlier.

How about a simple trade.

All handguns would be illegal to own period except for specific exemptions. In exchange, all MBRs ( Main Battle Rifles), barring a few exceptions, would be legal as per actual military specifications.

Handguns:

Exemptions would be for current and active law enforcement and military as per their role and duties. Also for any who have served in law enforcement and/or military for 20 years either solely or combined. If you've walked a beat and protected your city as a cop for 20 years or more, you've earned the right to keep your handgun. If you've given service and retired from the military and done your duty in good standing, you get to keep your handguns. Armored car drivers, some private security elements, there would be some practical exceptions.

MBRS:

All weapons must be full stock, no folding stocks/no sliding stocks/no collapsible stocks/no suppressors. No bullpups ( Immediately turfs the SA80, FAMAS and Steyr Aug) . No underside grenade launchers. Everything else though runs through as military spec. No restriction on magazine size. No restriction on bursts settings. No restrictions on bayonets. All weapons must conform to being a tried and true MBR that was in service at some point for some nation. For example the FN FAL. Full stocked Chinese Type 56 ( AK clone). The HK G3 is tried and true. M16A2 and M16A4. This fulfills the requirement to meet practical 2A. The Revolutionary War did not have rank and file soldiers being issued pistols on a regular basis. Some had their own. Officers had some. But they had MBRs.

If you turn in your handgun, you are given in trade surplus M16A2s still in mass storage. You don't sell your handgun, you trade it in for an MBR. Incoming handguns are used for military/law enforcement purposes/reserved armory holds.

I would prefer to keep all my guns. But if push came to shove, and believed the psychotic radical left woked out cancel culture manlets were coming for all our guns, and leave us with nothing but muzzleloaders, I'd rather trade my pistols to keep my MBRs.

The majority of gun violence happens with handguns. No handguns equals a reduction in gun related crime and violence. If someone is caught with an illegal handgun, then immediately stripped of US citizenship, stripped of all assets ( given to support local schools/parks/libraries/etc) and deported. This will clear the streets of some of the criminal element. Any country that takes US grain as food support/goodwill/humanitarian aid will take these deportees as part of the deal. They aren't US citizens anymore, do what you want to them. My guess is they will be enslaved or executed on the spot. Which is OK with me. If you want to be a drive by shooting criminal, good luck getting stabbed to death in a dark alley in a Third World hell hole. In fact, let's send all of our worst criminal elements this way, hard to complain about crime in the US when most of the hardened criminals have had their throats cuts outside of American soil. Wanna carjack someone with a Glock? OK, lose everything and lose your rights as an American and get stabbed right through the eye and end up in an unmarked foreign mass grave. Or being grinded down into cans of dogfood, I really don't care.  That's justice in my book.

Mostly I'd make the trade to shut people up. I gave up my handguns, so shut up. Leave the rest of my guns alone. The main argument that bothers many Pro 2A about AR15s is it looks like a pathway to simply go after all guns. I mean technically if they ban all guns except muzzleloaders and single barred shotguns, the radical left can technically say they didn't violate the Second Amendment, i.e they didn't take "all guns" away.

I can see an argument against a more easily concealable platform with a high rate of fire, however I don't see that same argument flying for a battle tested full length/full stock M16A2.

Anti 2A can't take all guns without all this mess. Pro 2A can't keep all guns without all this mess. So the only thing left is some kind of trade.

Would you make this trade?

GC.  Thank you for your reply. I didn’t wanna reply right away as I wanted to give it some thought. And honestly I don’t think I have an answer for you. The questions you ask here touch on many different levels - gun control, capital punishment, expulsion of American citizenship, etc etc etc.  These are all weighty topics that each deserve more thought, time and effort then I can give.  But I do appreciate the thoughtful non Alpha male schtick post and it’s certainly an interesting thought exercise.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Stealthycat said:

He was possibly the rarest exception in our history on who kills people - so yeah, that you chose him is odd

"if he didn't have access to guns" - what does that even mean? You know he was a millionaire and a pilot right? He could have flown an airplane into that concert and then what, you'd be calling for plane bans or? 

see this goes back to   "common sense" gun laws - and we have them

we have common sense drunk driving laws, when a person DUI's and kills someone, that's just accepted and no big deal right? We don't ban ban ban in a free society where an exceptionally small % of people do stuff wrong - that's not a free society at all is it ?

its not gun owners fault Paddock did what he did. its not Mandalay's. Its not the concert, its not the car Paddock drove there in or the luggage he smuggled the guns to his room in or the ammo company that made the ammunition. 

the fault is on Paddock 

 

what could have been done to stop him ?   truthfully nothing - he planned it meticulously. Had the Mandalay has armed guards to smash his door in faster that would have helped. If they'd have checked every bag coming in -that might have caught him but he'd have planned for all that anyway

do you not see that?  these evil people are going to do what they do - anti-gun people don't want to stop the murders or the deaths, they have no plan to stop the evil people. They just want them to use something else besides a gun

google search - key words "beaten to death" ..... its not the object that's the problem, never has been

https://www.google.com/search?q=beaten+to+death&rlz=1C1ONGR_enUS935US935&sxsrf=ALeKk034KarGBriu4NC1014Yw7O2nFL3iQ:1617896167405&source=lnms&tbm=nws&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiDi93y_O7vAhXRJzQIHYZmBnAQ_AUoAnoECAEQBA

 

 

This is all one long argument agreeing I should be able to get the box of grenades I want. 
I’m not planning on killing people with them but even if I do, I would have just used something else. Like an airplane. 
I WANT MY GRENADES
 

To the “average” person, like me, who is fine with licensed trained background checked gun ownership, who maybe owns a shotgun but isn’t into worshipping it, but is horrified that someone can get powerful enough weapons to shoot hundreds of people at a concert from the 32nd floor of a building  - this is what you sound like 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Stealthycat said:

give me the pen and executive power

  • the Boulder shooter would be dead today - he's 100% guilty and I'd make sure he wasn't going to waste anymore taxpayer dollars
  • I'd make sure the Federal Govt prosecuted anyone lying on a background check - they don't do anything right now
  • I'd make it easier for law abiding people to get guns - and I'd encourage stand your grand laws in all states (including training etc, people knowing their weapons) Citizens are the first responders, they are 99% trustworthy. TRUST THEM
  • I'd get into schools with safety training and showing kids a better understanding of guns
  • Mentally ill people and their sealed records go - and juvenile too. Ya'll want gun owners to give up rights, lets take privacy right, deal? That way everyone knows who the crazies are, right ?
  • I'm in favor of Red Flag laws IF DONE RIGHT

Remember, only a few hundreds people every year out of 300 million go wacko and mass kill. lets not punish the 99.9 % - lets stop the 0.1 % and you know what ?  You're not stopping drunk drivers, drug and driving, text and driving ........ those are acceptable things in order to HAVE those things

You're not stopping murderers either, but common sense laws we have already, we don't need more

 

Couldn't even get through a post without bringing up drunk drivers.  :wall:

I guess I am not sure how the above would address the problem we are talking about.   Seems like a lot of these are reactive ideas that aren't helping people not want to commit these terrible crimes or helping their situation.  

What exactly are you getting at with the bolded?  Also, if you demand people be specific with talking about guns and platforms, shouldn't you have to do a little better than "know who the crazies are?"    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, dkp993 said:

This is exactly why a conversation with you goes no where.  Not because I don’t believe in your right to have and opinion, you certainly have that right, but because you can’t see that the exact opposite of your statement above is true too.  You are acting exactly as you rail against just with the opposite viewpoint. Thus the conversation or discussion goes no where.  It can only go in the direction you want it to. To your view of “common sense”.   

so -fish- can say NRA rhetoric 1000 times and I've not seen you set to call him out on it and tell him the same as you're telling me

why ?

we've seen over and over people asking " what is an assault rifle" .... and anti-gun and gun control posters refuse to give an answer really, same with the gun show loopholes and all the same old anti-gun things CNN and media reports as told to by Liberals

Lets be honest - nothing Biden did today in his EO's is going to stop 1 murder. it wont, just like Obama's EO's didn't. So WHY DO THEM ?  do liberals ever ask themselves that question ? 

 

  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, KarmaPolice said:

Couldn't even get through a post without bringing up drunk drivers.  :wall:

I guess I am not sure how the above would address the problem we are talking about.   Seems like a lot of these are reactive ideas that aren't helping people not want to commit these terrible crimes or helping their situation.  

What exactly are you getting at with the bolded?  Also, if you demand people be specific with talking about guns and platforms, shouldn't you have to do a little better than "know who the crazies are?"    

I don’t know how any normal sane person can’t look at all those sacrifices that he’s giving up there but you want none of it. 
 

I don’t know you at all but can I please ask where are you from, what was your upbringing like? I’m going to guess you’re very privileged.

You remind me of the guys who get punched in the mouth and  instead of fighting back you say why did you hit me. 

If that’s true, I don’t want you talking about any policies on anything.

  • Like 1
  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Stealthycat said:

so -fish- can say NRA rhetoric 1000 times and I've not seen you set to call him out on it and tell him the same as you're telling me

why ?

we've seen over and over people asking " what is an assault rifle" .... and anti-gun and gun control posters refuse to give an answer really, same with the gun show loopholes and all the same old anti-gun things CNN and media reports as told to by Liberals

Lets be honest - nothing Biden did today in his EO's is going to stop 1 murder. it wont, just like Obama's EO's didn't. So WHY DO THEM ?  do liberals ever ask themselves that question ? 

 

Re: first bolded- there only so much time in the day SC.  It's not my job to play board cop.  Fish and I tend to have more similar viewpoint and I'm not here to engage in discussion with people I agree with

Re: underlined part- I have not discussed "assault rifles" nor care to.  My thoughts and feelings on the AR-15 have been laid out over these last few pages.  That's what I've been discussing.

Re: the last 2 bolded items-  I don't know, I'm not a liberal.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, growlers said:

This is all one long argument agreeing I should be able to get the box of grenades I want. 

except the "common sense" thing were supposed to have as American citizens ... oh and there is no Constitutional Right to have grenades I don't think ?

20 minutes ago, growlers said:

but is horrified that someone can get powerful enough weapons to shoot hundreds of people at a concert from the 32nd floor of a building

are you horrified at all deaths that can happen ?

why are you horrified? 25 million AR platform guns maybe in the USA, and today, none of them did anything wrong. You REALLY think they're a danger to you? why? You have a better chance of being killed by a drunk driver, by your diet, by covid ......... 

but since you're horrified ...... why don't you arm yourself so you can defend yourself against those few few people every year that want to hurt others? I mean, you're a victim right now, defenseless and hoping that someone with a gun saves you when things go bad, right ?

man, I'd hate to live every day "horrified" 

  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, KarmaPolice said:

I guess I am not sure how the above would address the problem we are talking about.   Seems like a lot of these are reactive ideas that aren't helping people not want to commit these terrible crimes or helping their situation.  

What exactly are you getting at with the bolded?  Also, if you demand people be specific with talking about guns and platforms, shouldn't you have to do a little better than "know who the crazies are?"

you can't see the focus on cracking down on bad people ?

you can't see the focus on stopping mentally ill from getting weapons? and I mean knives, cars, guns - all of it

 

I challenge each person to look at WHERE the murders are happening in the USA and the WHY's behind them. I don't think its rural America that's the problem. You want to stop murders? Break it down, who's doing the murders and why. Attack that - and get a plan to stop it.

If its illegal drugs the root cause of 60%? Then crack down HARD on drug dealing. HARD. If its domestic violence? Then a huge advertisement campaign to arm women - get guns to them so they can fight back instead of being a victim. If the root cause is poverty - then take back the 3-4 trillion that's been spent on pork projects and stop importing and get American's back to being productive maybe?

we can discuss a vast array of solutions if, and only if, we identify the CORE PROBLEM

boys and girls, if guns were it? the 80 million gun owners in America today would have let ya'll know it - wouldn't we ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, growlers said:

This is all one long argument agreeing I should be able to get the box of grenades I want. 
I’m not planning on killing people with them but even if I do, I would have just used something else. Like an airplane. 
I WANT MY GRENADES
 

To the “average” person, like me, who is fine with licensed trained background checked gun ownership, who maybe owns a shotgun but isn’t into worshipping it, but is horrified that someone can get powerful enough weapons to shoot hundreds of people at a concert from the 32nd floor of a building  - this is what you sound like 


So you realize that all guns shoot bullets right? 
 

AK-47, Carbines, FAMAS, AR, and even shotguns are all capable of shooting people at a high rate of fire. 

They can all do the same thing the AR platform does. Every time you pull the trigger, a bullet comes out- and there are faaaaar more deadly platforms than a AR. 

 

  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, dkp993 said:

Re: first bolded- there only so much time in the day SC.  It's not my job to play board cop.  Fish and I tend to have more similar viewpoint and I'm not here to engage in discussion with people I agree with

Re: underlined part- I have not discussed "assault rifles" nor care to.  My thoughts and feelings on the AR-15 have been laid out over these last few pages.  That's what I've been discussing.

Re: the last 2 bolded items-  I don't know, I'm not a liberal.  

you board cop me with no problems - but calling me out on a posting style while giving your like-minded -fish- a pass tells me you have no interest in discussing anything - am I right ?

you quickly dismiss - again - what an AR15 is, what semi-auto is ........... its like you simply don't care to even know what you're talking about but yet you have your mind made up on them. How's that possible ?

honest question - will what Biden did today reduce murders ANY ?   Seriously - and will it help get any violent people off the streets?

 

  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, KarmaPolice said:

Couldn't even get through a post without bringing up drunk drivers.  :wall:

they kill tens of thousands of people every year - tens of thousands MORE than rifles do

man - I thought we were trying to save lives here in America and focusing on the real issues ?

 

but you don't like any analogies or comparisons because they totally undermine the anti-gun arguments - ban ban ban to stop XXX but no ban ban ban to stop YYY and ZZZ because people want's the drugs, alcohol and automobiles and tens of thousands of dead people is acceptable collateral damage

am I right ?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, STEADYMOBBIN 22 said:


So you realize that all guns shoot bullets right? 
 

AK-47, Carbines, FAMAS, AR, and even shotguns are all capable of shooting people at a high rate of fire. 

They can all do the same thing the AR platform does. Every time you pull the trigger, a bullet comes out- and there are faaaaar more deadly platforms than a AR. 

 

they have no idea what you're talking about

 

  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, dkp993 said:

Again missed point.  There are lines.  One could argue handguns and rifles are apples to oranges.  

I guess I'm just not understanding your position.  It's not making sense to me.  :shrug:

The only thing I can infer from your posts (because you're not explaining yourself) is that "we have to draw the line somewhere so it might as well be here".

Edited by BladeRunner
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Stealthycat said:

they have no idea what you're talking about

 

That’s what makes all of this so infuriating. They see what the news feeds them (for ratings) and get all outraged. It’s maddening. 
 

I always tell people, watch a YouTube of a news report on a topic that you are intimately familiar with- you will be astonished at how dead wrong and misinformed the news folks are. 
 

The news media is literally the last place I would ever go to get information. 

  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, growlers said:

Did you read the article that you responded with this to?

it really was quite devoid of “emotion “, most of it described a physicians experience with the difference between high and low velocity bullet injuries. Actually the narrative at the end spot on describes my opinions on the subject. It’s a really good article. 

It’s impossible to discuss the topic with you guys.  I bring up the October 1 shooter, and told it’s somehow not relevant to the discussion.   It was the largest mass shooting in United States history and it was done from the 32nd floor of a hotel across a street with AR-15s and I’m told that the shooter would have killed the same number of people with a handgun or a knife.  Someone posts this article which gives the experience of a physician and it’s “emotional”.  You guys just regurgitate NRA taking points about mental illness over and over.   Then it turns out the October 1 shooter was never diagnosed as being mentally ill. Background checks are favored by what, 85% of Americans, yet the NRA and the republicans they pay off fight against them. 

And then we are told we are told WE are the ones being disingenuous.  
 

That mass shooter could have used any other semi-automatic rifle and caused the same amount of damage.  The AR-15 brings nothing special to the table.  :shrug:

We already have background checks - every time you buy a gun.  I'm not sure why you think there aren't any. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Stealthycat said:

you board cop me with no problems - but calling me out on a posting style while giving your like-minded -fish- a pass tells me you have no interest in discussing anything - am I right ?

you quickly dismiss - again - what an AR15 is, what semi-auto is ........... its like you simply don't care to even know what you're talking about but yet you have your mind made up on them. How's that possible ?

honest question - will what Biden did today reduce murders ANY ?   Seriously - and will it help get any violent people off the streets?

 

I didn't board cop you.  I didn't tell you what you can our can't do.  I was simply pointing out in my opinion why conversations with you on this topic never seem to go any where.  Take it or leave it, no skin of my back

I've dismissed nothing and made my thoughts very clear.

I have no idea what Biden did today.  Spent not one second look it up.  I have no idea if it's the best thing since sliced bread or the worst idea known to man.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, STEADYMOBBIN 22 said:

 

The news media is literally the last place I would ever go to get information. 

Where exactly does one go for daily/weekly information on what is happening in the world?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, STEADYMOBBIN 22 said:

That’s what makes all of this so infuriating. They see what the news feeds them (for ratings) and get all outraged. It’s maddening. 
 

I always tell people, watch a YouTube of a news report on a topic that you are intimately familiar with- you will be astonished at how dead wrong and misinformed the news folks are. 
 

The news media is literally the last place I would ever go to get information. 

Some people are like Labradors, but not as smart.  All they want is to be told what to do.

  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, BladeRunner said:

I'm guess I'm just not understanding your position.  It's not making sense to me.  :shrug:

Fair.  These are complex issues that are tough to summarize in short posts (and I have no desire to write Gordon Gekko length posts).  Also as you are passionate about guns it's far more nuanced conversation for you.  As your typical average Joe it's not for me.  I'm likely painting with a broader brush, I understand that.   

I can't boil my thoughts down to any more clear then this......  IMO - Weapons like the AR-15 make killing groups of people far easier to do for the average person, because that was/is the intended design of the gun.  Much like say a grenade does (I understand a grenade is not a gun I'm just using that to define my ease of use angle).  Yes people who intend to kill lots of others quickly can find other means to do it, and I'm not naïve to say "all violence will stop" if AR-15's are gone, but removing the ease to killing lots of people at once seems logical to me.  I don't have all the answers, or even maybe some, but I'm open to discussion about what removing the "ease" out of the equation may look like.  But unfortunately it never gets to that point, it gets bogged down into "whats a semi-auto" , "libs just want to take my guns", etc etc etc.  Much like our conversation has and like it does EVERY SINGLE TIME with SC.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, STEADYMOBBIN 22 said:


So you realize that all guns shoot bullets right? 
 

AK-47, Carbines, FAMAS, AR, and even shotguns are all capable of shooting people at a high rate of fire. 

They can all do the same thing the AR platform does. Every time you pull the trigger, a bullet comes out- and there are faaaaar more deadly platforms than a AR. 

 

This is exactly what I was repeating ad-naseum yesterday and no one would answer my questions:  What is an "Assault Rifle"?  What does Semi-Automatic mean?  Only @KarmaPolice replied because he wanted to get to the larger point.  Everyone else was lambasting me with talking points.

You can literally kill the same amount of people with a semi-automatic handgun.  The AR-15 only gives you the advantage of distance - LIKE ALL OTHER RIFLES!  So any semi-automatic rifle could lay waste like an AR-15.  Even a shotgun could take out quite a few people.  

That's the point, though.  Ban the AR-15 first and then go after the others.  It's a smoke screen for confiscating all weapons, IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, dkp993 said:

Fair.  These are complex issues that are tough to summarize in short posts (and I have no desire to write Gordon Gekko length posts).  Also as you are passionate about guns it's far more nuanced conversation for you.  As your typical average Joe it's not for me.  I'm likely painting with a broader brush, I understand that.   

I can't boil my thoughts down to any more clear then this......  IMO - Weapons like the AR-15 make killing groups of people far easier to do for the average person, because that was/is the intended design of the gun.  Much like say a grenade does (I understand a grenade is not a gun I'm just using that to define my ease of use angle).  Yes people who intend to kill lots of others quickly can find other means to do it, and I'm not naïve to say "all violence will stop" if AR-15's are gone, but removing the ease to killing lots of people at once seems logical to me.  I don't have all the answers, or even maybe some, but I'm open to discussion about what removing the "ease" out of the equation may look like.  But unfortunately it never gets to that point, it gets bogged down into "whats a semi-auto" , "libs just want to take my guns", etc etc etc.  Much like our conversation has and like it does EVERY SINGLE TIME with SC.

I appreciate it.  I just want to add one more thing for you to at least think about it:

The AR-15 brings nothing special to the table.  ANY semi-automatic rifle - which is what the AR-15 is - can cause the same amount of damage.  That's why I'm asking why everyone is so focused on the AR?  It is NOT an automatic weapon.  It's like most other semi-automatic rifles.

Does that clear anything up?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, the moops said:

I mean they did pretty much out his race by saying he was a former NFL cornerback

Not in the original story. No identifying info in original

Eta: looks like entire original story is gone. Original author not one of the three listed.

Edited by parasaurolophus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, STEADYMOBBIN 22 said:

I don’t know how any normal sane person can’t look at all those sacrifices that he’s giving up there but you want none of it. 
 

I don’t know you at all but can I please ask where are you from, what was your upbringing like? I’m going to guess you’re very privileged.

You remind me of the guys who get punched in the mouth and  instead of fighting back you say why did you hit me. 

If that’s true, I don’t want you talking about any policies on anything.

WTF are you talking about?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, BladeRunner said:

I appreciate it.  I just want to add one more thing for you to at least think about it:

The AR-15 brings nothing special to the table.  ANY semi-automatic rifle - which is what the AR-15 is - can cause the same amount of damage.  That's why I'm asking why everyone is so focused on the AR?  It is NOT an automatic weapon.  It's like most other semi-automatic rifles.

Does that clear anything up?

I absolutely understand all of that, always have.  It's (the AR-15) the focus now as it seems to be the weapon of choice for these situations.  That's why it's getting the attention.  And sure there are some anti-gun zealots out there that do want to take your guns, just like there are those that want no restrictions at all.  But that's not the majority and it's certainly not me.  But something needs to be done to address this problem and all to often that conversation gets side tracked (as it did with us).  

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Stealthycat said:

you can't see the focus on cracking down on bad people ?

you can't see the focus on stopping mentally ill from getting weapons? and I mean knives, cars, guns - all of it

 

I challenge each person to look at WHERE the murders are happening in the USA and the WHY's behind them. I don't think its rural America that's the problem. You want to stop murders? Break it down, who's doing the murders and why. Attack that - and get a plan to stop it.

If its illegal drugs the root cause of 60%? Then crack down HARD on drug dealing. HARD. If its domestic violence? Then a huge advertisement campaign to arm women - get guns to them so they can fight back instead of being a victim. If the root cause is poverty - then take back the 3-4 trillion that's been spent on pork projects and stop importing and get American's back to being productive maybe?

we can discuss a vast array of solutions if, and only if, we identify the CORE PROBLEM

boys and girls, if guns were it? the 80 million gun owners in America today would have let ya'll know it - wouldn't we ?

So you are strenuously telling people to look at the core problem, but you don't know what the core problem is?   That is a ton of ifs, for being very confident in telling us to look at the core problem.  

As to the first two - like I said, most of what you posted seemed like reactive solutions - ie crack down after they have decided to do this act or hope that somebody is there with a gun and will actually do something.   

You keep saying "mentally ill" without anything further.   Is there commonalities in the shooters?   If not, how is that going to help (instead of many suggestions of doing that in tandem with gun regulation). 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
  • Create New...