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.
Why? Because multiple people were only injured and not dead? If they died of their injuries today would it then become a mass shooting? I really don't understand the reasoning of the distinction you're trying to make here.
Of course you do. It would make it look like a lot les people are getting shot if mass shooting = what people typically think of (massage parlor/school/etc)"Mass Murders" term is overused and loaded. That's all we're saying.
IDK, a lot of these people are cowards, that is why they use the guns.
thing is it gets a fleeting burb as news, but it happens so often that it gets washed away with the laundry. but a white guy shoots a black guy, well katy bar the door!
No the snippet I posted was part of the news cycle saying 4 mass shootings this weekend!!!!!. When this one there was a fight inside, and 4 people were injured. It's not the same as a Parkland type shooting
but that's how it's portrayed and I don't agree
it's a hot button topic that gets clicks.
Really, you wonder why Joe American might be a little more focused on one type vs the other? (despite it being less frequent)
Really love this part of the article:
they haven't confirmed anything about the NJ other than it was a "targeted shooting." The Columbus one was outside. The Minnesota one was a shooting outside a club. Not sure what you're referring to.No the snippet I posted was part of the news cycle saying 4 mass shootings this weekend!!!!!. When this one there was a fight inside, and 4 people were injured. It's not the same as a Parkland type shooting
And ftr I'm all for a second amendment overhaul and don't agree with pernitless carry
Again I never replied to you. I'm referring to the CNN article that lumped my snippet in with the rest.
Modern day Texas still hasn’t learned the lesson small towns of the late 1800's learned. Unreal.
CBS News @CBSNews 31m
VTA Center in San Jose.
So is the retired detective implying a correlation between shooters and vaccinations? I couldn't get the link to work.
Retired NYPD detective Pat Brosnan on Fox News with weird takeaway from the San Jose mass shooting:
"Once covid starts to lift, these cowardly shooters will come out exactly in tandem with the number of vaccinations. You can be sure they probably got vaccinated."
https://twitter.com/justinbaragona/status/1397582489980395522 (video clip at link)
Yes, something to that effect. I guessing he is saying that vaccines are bad because mass shooters are no longer scared to go outside rather than vaccines are causing mass shootings. He didn't clarify his statement and Fox didn't follow up, so he may have meant something else.
I don't think I've EVER seen fish in here complaining about Chicago. Only places NOT named Chicago.
i have an issue with all gun violence. i have repeatedly criticized the decisions in Miller, Heller and McDonald that allow unfettered gun ownership. i am also critical of the lax gun laws in the states bordering Illinois. what falsehood would you like me to correct next?
Ban those too unless you need it for your work as a security guard, rancher, or police.
How about you move to another country? We get to keep the Constitution and you get to live in a place without guns. Win-Win for everyone.
10 people died needlessly and yet rather than show compassion, you feel the need to type this. Ugh
Since you keep bringing this up as some sort of weird "gotcha". Who exactly do you expect to collect info on where the guns are from after the city of Chicago police confiscate them after crimes?
Is there any reporting that the magazines exceeded 10 rounds? That is the limit in Cali.
Chicago, Baltimore, LA... I'm jumping in a little late, but it's the basic line of thinking that additional gun laws don't prevent shootings, maybe we need to consider things other than more gun restrictions.
It just sucks that the framers didn't think to put things like Freedom of Speech and the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances into the Bill of Rights as well. Imagine if they had done that, and maybe put it right in the very first amendment! It would have been like they were okay with American citizens expressing opinions that might run counter to what they were putting down on pap... er... parchment. Or... and I know this is going to sound crazy, but hear me out, it would have been really cool if they had built in some way to change the Constitution in case at some point, say 250 years in the future, people decided that maybe this document from 250 years in the past didn't perfectly address the current situation. Oh well. Swing and a miss there.
Yeah, you debunked the NRA Talking Point with the Anti-Gun talking points.
Yeah, that would be cool.
Gotcha, I never see anything besides Chicago brought up.
So the question needs to be, why isn't Indiana's murder rate as bad as Chicago's if all the illegal guns are coming from there and they have less restrictive gun laws?
We need to work to restore the nuclear family, societal values and a sense of community. It's definitely a heavy lift, but I think it would be a more rewarding outcome for America than blanket gun restriction
of course, huge cities would be their own thing too.
