Jump to content

The debate over assault weapons


Recommended Posts

You know these young  wanna be something mentally ill mass shooter are  using the wrong weapon....pump shotgun with #4 buckshot...which is why the "assault weapon ban"...is a slippery slope that should never be implemented ….gallon jugs at gas infront of the doors at the WallMart would have resulted in more deaths...banned milk jugs and register for gas purchase...silly liberals

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 2.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Tom, please recall that most of us stopped being polite to you after you humorously called for the regulation of Dodge Challengers like the one used in the Charlottesville murder.  It's crypto-Na

And keep the guns locked up or in your possession.  Kids have friends who come over.

So race baiting is calling you out for your own history of racist posts, Joe? Or is the "race-baiting" the part where everyone reads your words and ascribes a racist intent to it, even if that wa

Posted Images

On 8/8/2019 at 3:57 AM, Repastinate Tom said:


And yet, who offers T's and P's of DOING SOMETHING and who ignores the inconvenient "mass" shootings that our stupid drug war spawns?

Seems to me that grabbers only care about politically convenient victims and when there's yet another drug gang drive by in a place like Chicago they just don't care at all.

In the first line, you glibly blame mass shootings on  the drug war, without evidence. We call that scapegoating.

About 52% of the mass murders are domestic, and others seem to be rednecks gone wrong. I can cite that evidence.

In the second line, you coo Chicago, using drugs as a canard again.

  • But the issue is often the gun being added to typical human stress---that is, to economic stress
  • Poor economic factors, and a playing field tipped by rednecks, only generate drug activity
  • Go ahead, be golden dogballs, step up to this problem, without gun rhetoric

 

You parade your issues all about, with joy, but you never manage to understand basic stuff.

Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, jocal505 said:

About 52% of the mass murders are domestic, and others seem to be rednecks gone wrong. I can cite that evidence.

Heh! Please do, I need some entertainment.

In the time I've been following the Gungrabby Archives' posts, I think I've noted a couple of domestics at most. I guess you think Chicago is full of rednecks, since "mass" shootings seem to happen there a lot.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Repastinate Tom said:

Heh! Please do, I need some entertainment.

In the time I've been following the Gungrabby Archives' posts, I think I've noted a couple of domestics at most. I guess you think Chicago is full of rednecks, since "mass" shootings seem to happen there a lot.

Do you think you could bury this thread since the 'debate' over assault weapons is all but over? 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Repastinate Tom said:

Heh! Please do, I need some entertainment.

In the time I've been following the Gungrabby Archives' posts, I think I've noted a couple of domestics at most. I guess you think Chicago is full of rednecks, since "mass" shootings seem to happen there a lot.

The causes of violence are not inferred, specified, or identified by the GVA. They are unknown and remain unproven, until investigation.

You just make shit up every day.

These men and women have been found guilty of drug and gang actions, without evidence, by dogballs, who is a somewhat royal figure.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mass Shooting In Illinois

 

Quote

 

District

Congressional District: 1
State Senate District: 16
State House District: 32

At least four people were wounded Friday in a drive-by in Marquette Park on the Southwest Side.

 

Yes, of course it's Chicago again and very likely it's the stupid drug war again. But Undoing Something isn't a hot topic. Four is four so we must DO SOMETHING.

 

Mass Shooting In Virginia

 

Quote

 

District

Congressional District: 4
State Senate District: 10
State House District: 69

Richmond Police said four people arrived at a local hospital with gunshot wounds early Saturday morning.

Units responded to a call for a shooting around 1:45 a.m. in the 6300 block of Midlothian Turnpike.

Police tape blocked off the parking lots outside of the Richmond Inn and Suites and Novus Room Sports Bar for several hours.

 

Not much is known but four is four and we have to protect the children who are in bars at 1:45 am, so the obvious SOLution is the same as it ever was: DO SOMETHING.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Repastinate Tom said:

Mass Shooting In Illinois

 

Yes, of course it's Chicago again and very likely it's the stupid drug war again. But Undoing Something isn't a hot topic. Four is four so we must DO SOMETHING.

 

Mass Shooting In Virginia

 

Not much is known but four is four and we have to protect the children who are in bars at 1:45 am, so the obvious SOLution is the same as it ever was: DO SOMETHING.

ghoul time, serve us up the dogballs, on a fine sunday morning

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mass Shooting In California

 

Quote

 

District

Congressional District: 12
State Senate District: 11
State House District: 17

The attack took place around 11:30 p.m. in a parking lot outside a McDonald’s restaurant at Fillmore Street and Golden Gate Avenue.

The victims, all of them adults, were taken to a hospital. One victim had life-threatening injuries, while the three others are expected to survive, said police spokesman Officer Robert Rueca.

“We do not believe this was a random act,” Rueca said. It “appears that the victims were targeted.”

 

Gee, looks like more stupid drug war violence to me, in an area where one of the articles says that has happened a couple of times this year already. But four is four so the SOLution is the same as always: DO SOMETHING.

 

Mass Shooting In Illinois

 

Quote

 

District

Congressional District: 7
State Senate District: 5
State House District: 10

 

The source link did not work but the URL ended this way:

multiple-wounded-garfield-park-drive-by-gun-violence

Gee, another stupid drug war drive-by in Chicago. Again. But Undoing Something isn't a hot topic. Six is more than four so we must DO SOMETHING.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Repastinate Tom said:

Mass Shooting In California

 

Gee, looks like more stupid drug war violence to me, in an area where one of the articles says that has happened a couple of times this year already. But four is four so the SOLution is the same as always: DO SOMETHING.

 

Mass Shooting In Illinois

 

The source link did not work but the URL ended this way:

multiple-wounded-garfield-park-drive-by-gun-violence

Gee, another stupid drug war drive-by in Chicago. Again. But Undoing Something isn't a hot topic. Six is more than four so we must DO SOMETHING.

 

Are you trying to fix the drug war and inner city strife with guns? With more violence?

Go to the causes of the problems in these areas. If Marion Hammer and others fix the problems, no guns will be needed, and less gun mayhem will be found.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/12/2019 at 3:09 AM, jocal505 said:

Are you trying to fix the drug war and inner city strife with guns? With more violence?

, depend on strawman Joe ,,

 

 

Tom is, once again, pointing out the CAUSAL factors for violence.

?? Criminal (and/or) Crazy ?? 

, things that illuminate team Grabberz  Chickenshittery  in their refusal to discuss.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Mike in Seattle said:

, depend on strawman Joe ,,

 

 

Tom is, once again, pointing out the CAUSAL factors for violence.

?? Criminal (and/or) Crazy ??  Pay attention. The AW thread was hijacked, became nonstop scapegoating; contains drug war allegations five times a week

, things that illuminate team Grabberz  Chickenshittery  in their refusal to discuss.

 

Hi MIke,

Yep, Jeff and Tom argue constantly to correct the human behavior behind the gun violence. Well, if you ponder this a bit, it won't be long before you face the sociological basics. Maslow demonstrated that human behavior will de-generate when circumstances have de-generated, and that human behavior will improve when circumstances improve. So yeah, I suggest that Mike in Seattle fix the problem behind the big shooting situations developing in Chicago, St. Louis, Baltimore, Talahasee, Ferguson, and elsewhere. Duh.

ABOUT THE GANGSTAS

This drug war damage, this violent behavior, displays economic ill, in certain places. You are trying to correct the problem, or to contain the problem, with guns, with their distribution, and with your "self defense" values.

You are not addressing the economic problem in play (oozing from CATO), or the vengeance-values problem in play (oozing from Boothy and Jeff). You are just slinging gunz, and the Larry Pratt lifestyle, basically. Especially you.

You fight so well that Shannon Watts is standing on your neck.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mass Shooting In Mississippi

 

Quote

 

District

Congressional District: 2
State Senate District: 24
State House District: 32

Police Chief Ray Moore said the shooting reportedly happened on Young Street behind Hoover’s Grocery.

 

That's about all that is known, other than the types of guns that need to be banned in response, so WTF people are doing behind the grocery store is left to speculation. Something they don't want seen would be reasonable speculation. Something to do with the stupid drug war. Again. But four is four so we must DO SOMETHING.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Repastinate Tom said:

so WTF people are doing behind the grocery store is left to speculation. Something they don't want seen would be reasonable speculation. Something to do with the stupid drug war. Again.

Innuendo. Again.

McCarthy, racial policy.JPG

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mass Shooting In Washington State

 

Quote

 

District

Congressional District: 10
State Senate District: 27
State House District: 27

One of the men killed late Tuesday in a shooting on a Tacoma street left two dead and three injured has been identified.

Antoine Jamir Holmes, 26, of University Place, was pronounced dead at the scene.

The Pierce County Medical Examiner’s Office has not identified the second man killed in the shooting, which took place about 11:40 p.m. near East 38th Street and East Roosevelt Avenue.

No one has been arrested.

Detectives are investigating the shooting and have not released details about what led up to the incident.

 

Not much is known but we do know the legislative district info and we know that five is more than four so the political SOLution is the same as always. DO SOMETHING.

 

Mass Shooting In Pennsylvania

 

Quote

 

District

Congressional District: 3
State Senate District: 3
State House District: 198

Gunfire initially erupted around 4:30 p.m. after narcotics officers served a warrant to a house near the corner of North 15th and West Butler streets, according to officials.

As officers rushed upstairs, a gunman waiting downstairs with an AK-47 fired several rounds through the ceiling. Police returned fire while several officers escaped through windows and doors.

Neighbors said they watched in terror as the violent scene unfolded on their block. 

 

Gee, the stupid drug war again. The suspect's criminal record means that his possession of a gun was a failure of gun control, another indicator that people who make a living dealing in illegal things are somehow able to get their hands on illegal things. Yugely surprising that gun control works worst on the people who matter most. But no matter. Six is more than four so TnP of DOING SOMETHING.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mass Shooting In Pennsylvania

 

Quote

 

District

Congressional District: 3
State Senate District: 4
State House District: 201

one victim is listed in critical condition, four others suffered non-life threatening injuries.


Detectives say there were multiple shooters and believe this was targeted

"They may have been running after that because it appears there's a stretch for almost a block suggesting at least to us preliminary that someone was chasing him," said Police Commissioner Richard Ross.

No arrests have been made.

Anyone with any information is asked to call police at 215-686-TIPS.

 

Gee, looks like the stupid drug war yet again. Anyone who wants to become a target is asked to call police at 215-686-TIPS. That will work about as well as the rest of the stupid drug war, and about as well as gun control laws work at disarming these violent drug gangs.

Still, five is more than four and the legislative district info is conveniently provided, so we must mindlessly DO SOMETHING.

 

Mass Shooting In Alabama

 

Quote

 

District

Congressional District: 7
State Senate District: 26
State House District: 77

Montgomery Police Sgt. Jarrett Williams says five people were shot in the area of the 800 block of N. University Boulevard. One died at the scene, another at a local hospital, while two others remain with life-threatening injuries and one with non life-threatening injuries.

Alabama State President Quinton Ross Jr., in a statement shared with ASU faculty and staff, says the shooting is unrelated to the university but that it happened at a business near campus.

 

The words "university" and "campus" appear in the description, so this might be a school shooting, the very most convenient kind for gungrabby purposes.

In any case, it's obvious that five is more than four and the legislative district info is conveniently provided, so we must mindlessly DO SOMETHING.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mass Shooting In Texas

 

Quote

 

District

Congressional District: 29
State Senate District: 6
State House District: 143

Seven people were shot after a fight broke out at a house party in east Houston, according to the Houston Police Department. 

Around 1:45 a.m. Saturday, a large group of people were at an "instant house party" that started via Snapchat. 

All seven victims suffered non life-threatening injuries and all are expected to be OK.

 

Like most recent mass shootings, no one was killed, but seven is way more than four so TnP of DOING SOMETHING.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting. The thread, and the very important topic it covers, has been hijacked. It has been dominated.

While in the real world (meaning outside of the dogballs bubble),  the polls say 90% of the populace wants background checks, and 76% want red flag laws, and that gun violence prevention is increasingly considered a top issue for voters.

GVP is a top issue on the telly now, every day.

IMO, after the recent DOUBLE mass shootings (in which AW's were predictably used in each setting), the wheels are finally coming off of Larry Pratt and his SAF choo choo. I feel a sense of personal celebration, and even relief, in this cycle.

The successful direction of the SAF ideas concerned me, deeply. IMO the direction is changing, dramatically.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

3  separate mass shootings were barely avoided this week  if each case the shooters were loaded for bear with AW’s and some variation of extended capacity mags, titanium body armor, ballistic helmets, thousands of rounds of ammo. The stated goal was to kill 100 people

One thing not found was bump stocks, presumably because they were BANNED.  

My suggestion is we ban all of the above and throw people found with them in prison for not less than 10 years. 

https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/18/us/three-potential-attacks-foiled/index.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mass Shooting In Missouri

 

Quote

 

District

Congressional District: 5
State Senate District: 7
State House District: 24

At about 3:20 a.m. on Sunday morning, police were dispatched to the Sheraton Hotel on the Plaza, 770 W. 47th St., on a shooting call on a floor of the hotel in a room.

When they arrived, they found four teens shot inside a hotel room. Two of the teens are in life-threatening condition, the other two have non-life threatening injuries.

According to police, there was a gathering of teens in the room and at some point, an argument broke out that led to gunfire, at least one suspect firing multiple rounds.

 

Four is four so we must DO SOMETHING.

20 hours ago, jocal505 said:

Interesting. The thread, and the very important topic it covers, has been hijacked. It has been dominated.

Can I help it if I'm the only one who actually takes a look at all these mass shootings that are used to justify banning squirrel shooters, plinking pistols, and other assault weapons?

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Fakenews said:

My suggestion is we ban all of the above and throw people found with them in prison for not less than 10 years. 

https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/18/us/three-potential-attacks-foiled/index.html

We'have some men who need to re-program their male-ness. Seriously. Incarceration is not the goal.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Repastinate Tom said:

Can I help it if I'm the only one who actually takes a look at all these mass shootings that are used to justify banning squirrel shooters, plinking pistols, and other assault weapons?

Is there a legal gun of any caliber legally available currently that you would support further restricting or banning? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

pYes please....

At your request, I cited the first part, that most mass shootings are domestic. You think you are a smart one, so I just assume you remember all that.

Rednecks gone wrong? I can find such evidence. The rednecks are inspired these days. They love race-baiting from the prez, it jacks them up. I read that the armed redneck incidents are increasing... in these days of the Trumpster voters.

 

But here's the anecdotal, @Shootist Jeff:

  • any shooter of tirechuckers,
  • Pooplius (if you do fisticuffs twice with him),
  • Boothy for sure,
  • Dylan Roof,
  • the Waco shooter,
  • Timothy McVeigh,
  • Randy Weaver
  • and George Zimmerman.
  • Steamer Man if provoked by the carrying of a Nazi flag in his hood.

I admit to stereotyping, profiling, and innuendo as well...but what do I win?

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, bpm57 said:

You asserting something isn't a cite, Joe.

I am avoiding repeating myself upon command. Yep, most mass shootings are domestic. (Not the drug war.) You are keen indeed...and this is my third posting of this info.

Quote

A majority of mass shootings in the United States in recent years have been related to domestic and family violence, a recent analysis of US gun deaths has found.

 

The study conducted by Everytown for Gun Safety, a gun-control advocacy group, analyzed FBI data and media reports to identify a total of 110 mass shootings that occurred in the US between January 2009 and July 2014.

 

The group found 57 percent of mass murders in which at least four people were killed with a gun were related to domestic or family violence.

http://www.presstv.com/detail/2014/07/18/371848/many-us-mass-shootings-family-related/>

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Sean said:
22 hours ago, Repastinate Tom said:

Can I help it if I'm the only one who actually takes a look at all these mass shootings that are used to justify banning squirrel shooters, plinking pistols, and other assault weapons?

Is there a legal gun of any caliber legally available currently that you would support further restricting or banning? 

Sure, if a compelling argument for doing so were made.

"These are deadly military weapons" isn't a compelling argument when it comes to squirrel shooters or plinking handguns, at least to me.

Is there a legal gun of any caliber legally available currently that you would oppose further restricting or banning? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, jocal505 said:

Yep, most mass shootings are domestic. (Not the drug war.)

Bloomberg $peak$ about murders in the link you provided but most mass shootings result in no deaths at all, as noted over and over in this thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Repastinate Tom said:

Bloomberg $peak$ about murders in the link you provided but most mass shootings result in no deaths at all, as noted over and over in this thread.

No deaths for you to celebrate. Just a bunch of shot up human survivors who won't be voting Libertarian.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Repastinate Tom said:

Sure, if a compelling argument for doing so were made.

"These are deadly military weapons" isn't a compelling argument when it comes to squirrel shooters or plinking handguns, at least to me.

Is there a legal gun of any caliber legally available currently that you would oppose further restricting or banning? 

I’ll take that as a “no”. Thanks for playing. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Sean said:

That was fun, but the Big Boss has already gone CVS on the topic, despite his comments on background checks right after the latest series of rights-removal in El Paso and Dayton. Capitulating Very Strongly. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Sean said:
1 hour ago, Repastinate Tom said:

Is there a legal gun of any caliber legally available currently that you would oppose further restricting or banning? 

I’ll take that as a “no”. Thanks for playing. 

I’ll take that as a “no”. Thanks for playing. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

School Shooting In Georgia

 

Quote

 

District

Congressional District: 5
State Senate District: 36
State House District: 56

According to Atlanta Police, it happened around 10:30 p.m. on Tuesday near the intersection of James P. Brawley Drive SW and Beckwith Street SW. That's near the heart of the Atlanta University Center in Atlanta's west side.

Police said they initially found three female students with gunshot wounds near the Atlanta University Center library. Those students were immeditely taken to Grady Hospital. That's when a fourth student showed up to the hospital as well to be treated for a gun shot wound.

According to the school's calendar, classes are set to start Wednesday, Aug. 21.

Police told 11Alive that two victims are Clark Atlanta students (ages 18 and 19) and two are from Spelman (ages 17 and 18). Investigators believe two separate groups were targeting each other and the four female victims were simply caught in the crossfire.

 

Groups. Gangs. Whatever.

A block party near a closed university at night. But it's a school and four is four, so more reason than ever to DO SOMETHING.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/20/2019 at 2:36 AM, Repastinate Tom said:
On 8/19/2019 at 9:52 AM, Sean said:

Is there a legal gun of any caliber legally available currently that you would support further restricting or banning? 

Sure, if a compelling argument for doing so were made.

The "compelling arguments" are hidden behind the blockage of the relevant research on gun violence. dogballs stuff. 

Which = Libertarians implemented ignorance. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/13/2019 at 4:59 AM, Mike in Seattle said:

Tom is, once again, pointing out the CAUSAL factors for violence.

?? Criminal (and/or) Crazy ?? 

, things that illuminate team Grabberz  Chickenshittery  in their refusal to discuss.

 

Cut the bullshit, Mikey. For sincere men, the search for "causal factors" leads to "Priorities for Research," which is the 2013 blueprint for the causal study of gun violence.

The IOM put it together for the CDC. It is 120 pages long, and its existence is direct result of Sandy Hook.

 

The aftermath of Sandy Hook reflected a national Pearl Harbor moment.The report was constructed by the best, in this moment of exceptional awareness. 

@Shootist Jeff The CDC did the report without backlash from the NRA because we were surfing on dead children at the time.

It turns out that Lapierre had to get away in the aftermath, the Sandy Hook Community sits near the NRA HQ, I understand. NRA staff members had to have been affected directly and indiurectly.  Funeral time times 26.

Wayne and his wifee went off to a Caribbean cabana on pink sandy beaches...The bill for his extended stay there is now an issue in lawsuits.

 

But I digress. If you want causal,  I can present full causal. Each link works.

Quote

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, jocal505 said:

 

Cut the bullshit, Mikey. For sincere men, the search for "causal factors" leads to "Priorities for Research," which is the 2013 blueprint for the causal study of gun violence.

The IOM put it together for the CDC. It is 120 pages long, and its existence is direct result of Sandy Hook.

 

The aftermath of Sandy Hook reflected a national Pearl Harbor moment.The report was constructed by the best, in this moment of exceptional awareness. 

@Shootist Jeff The CDC did the report without backlash from the NRA because we were surfing on dead children at the time.

It turns out that Lapierre had to get away in the aftermath, the Sandy Hook Community sits near the NRA HQ IIRC. Wayne and his wifee went off to a Caribbean cabana on pink sandy beaches...The bill for his extended stay there is now an issue in lawsuits.

But I digress. If you want causal,  I can present full causal: 

 

Geography is another of your awesome strengths, eh Joe?   Sandy Hook is in SW CT, the NRA HQ is in Fairfax, VA.   More of your vetted research, or just another indication of your propensity to say anything that you think is sticking it to the people who realize that you're a disingenuous twit? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

Geography is another of your awesome strengths, eh Joe?   Sandy Hook is in SW CT, the NRA HQ is in Fairfax, VA.   More of your vetted research, or just another indication of your propensity to say anything that you think is sticking it to the people who realize that you're a disingenuous twit? 

Hi there, Guy. I stand corrected, and I thank you for your effort and attention. However, I have heard of a key gun outfit near Sandy Hook.

 

Set that aside, and the grand smears and cheap shots aside too.  THINK EFFICACIOUSLY, my fine man, seriously. You and I have mixed it up about research, the type of research you insist upon. Do you now support federal research on gun violence?

Do you proffer nothing in 2019, as usual?

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, jocal505 said:

Hi there, Guy. I stand corrected, and I thank you for your effort and attention. However, I have heard of a key gun outfit near Sandy Hook.

 

Set that aside, and the grand smears and cheap shots aside too.  THINK EFFICACIOUSLY, my fine man, seriously. You and I have mixed it up about research, the type of research you insist upon. Do you now support federal research on gun violence?

 Do you proffer nothing in 2019, as usual?

I've remained consistent in my position - I completely support objective research into the causes of violence. I don't support federal research on "Gun Violence" - because I don't believe that the implement should be the focus of research into causal factors of violence.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

hI've remained consistent in my position - I completely support objective research into the causes of violence. I don't support federal research on "Gun Violence" - because I don't believe that the implement should be the focus of research into causal factors of violence.  

You are not only lost, but ignorant. With tricky thinking.

Sir, you just called me disingenuous just a few posts ago. You have a nail-in-the-forehead issue. (thx to Ismael for a gem)

 

15 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

:lol: The "I'm scared of what might be found" argument against science.

Yes. Unchanged over the course of five significant years. I expect better of some guys.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/19/2019 at 12:52 PM, Sean said:

Is there a legal gun of any caliber legally available currently that you would support further restricting or banning? 

Yes!  Ruger 10/22s. They are the Bain of gun violence. 

And ruger Mini-14s. Shit wannabe assault rifles that suck at everything. 

And Ruger precision rifles. They are anything but....

and all Ruger pistols. They suck and kill far too many people. Well except for the Ruger SR-22 threaded barrel version. I could live with that one. :ph34r:

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/19/2019 at 2:14 PM, jocal505 said:

At your request, I cited the first part, that most mass shootings are domestic. You think you are a smart one, so I just assume you remember all that.

Rednecks gone wrong? I can find such evidence. The rednecks are inspired these days. They love race-baiting from the prez, it jacks them up. I read that the armed redneck incidents are increasing... in these days of the Trumpster voters.

 

But here's the anecdotal, @Shootist Jeff:

  • any shooter of tirechuckers,
  • Pooplius (if you do fisticuffs twice with him),
  • Boothy for sure,
  • Dylan Roof,
  • the Waco shooter,
  • Timothy McVeigh,
  • Randy Weaver
  • and George Zimmerman.
  • Steamer Man if provoked by the carrying of a Nazi flag in his hood.

I admit to stereotyping, profiling, and innuendo as well...but what do I win?

I’m not seeing any cites here. You said you could provide cites, not memories. I don’t follow everything you post, so post your cites as you said you could/would. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

Yes!  Ruger 10/22s. They are the Bain of gun violence. 

And ruger Mini-14s. Shit wannabe assault rifles that suck at everything. 

And Ruger precision rifles. They are anything but....

and all Ruger pistols. They suck and kill far too many people. Well except for the Ruger SR-22 threaded barrel version. I could live with that one. :ph34r:

Progress!  From there it’s a short hop to banning all AR 15 variants.

Next up Glocks.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/21/2019 at 2:48 PM, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

:lol: The "I'm scared of what might be found" argument against science.

Fuck awf, cunt  AGITC is spot on. Guns are not causal to violence. Period. Dot. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

I’m not seeing any cites here. You said you could provide cites, not memories. I don’t follow everything you post, so post your cites as you said you could/would. 

 

Sometimes I wonder what you spend your time reading. At other times you seem to be a real dumbass, too. Are you thick? Fat? Lazy? WHast? Do you lack skils or resources or something? Need attention?

REDNECKS GONE WRONG, WITH THEIR REDNECK GUNZ

To relieve your four days of angst and testiness over this, what I did was I googled "right wing attacks increasing?" This is what came up Jeffie. You are so clever, and so bright, you can take it from here.

In the United States, right-wing violence is on the rise ...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/in-the-united-states-right-wing-violence-is-on...

Data shows more US terror attacks by right-wing and ...

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/21/2019 at 2:33 PM, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

I've remained consistent in my position - I completely support objective research into the causes of violence. I don't support federal research on "Gun Violence" - because I don't believe that the implement should be the focus of research into causal factors of violence.  

And in the absence of any data, you can remain firm in that preconceived notion.

Seems kinda contrary to common sense to me. Wouldn't you agree that the absence of a firearm greatly reduces the odds of a fatality by firearm?

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

And in the absence of any data, you can remain firm in that preconceived notion.

Seems kinda contrary to common sense to me. Wouldn't you agree that the absence of a firearm greatly reduces the odds of a fatality by firearm?

- DSK

The tangential corollary you proffer is really intended to suggest that the opposite, "the presence of a firearm greatly increases the odds of a fatality by firearm" - and the data suggests that this isn't the case at all.   How many firearms are known to be in circulation in this country?  How many uses of those result in a fatality?  

Put another way - if we didn't have cars, nobody would have automobile accidents.  So - if we *really* want to reduce traffic fatalities, we ought to get rid of cars.  reductio ad absurdum.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, jocal505 said:

 

Sometimes I wonder what you spend your time reading. At other times you seem to be a real dumbass, too. Are you thick? Fat? Lazy? WHast? Do you lack skils or resources or something? Need attention?

REDNECKS GONE WRONG, WITH THEIR REDNECK GUNZ

To relieve your four days of angst and testiness over this, what I did was I googled "right wing attacks increasing?" This is what came up Jeffie. You are so clever, and so bright, you can take it from here.

In the United States, right-wing violence is on the rise ...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/in-the-united-states-right-wing-violence-is-on...

Data shows more US terror attacks by right-wing and ...

Except right wing attacks is not the subject here.  You said you could provide cites of domestic violence being the majority of mass shootings.  Still waiting.....

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/9/2019 at 8:51 AM, jocal505 said:

About 52% of the mass murders are domestic, and others seem to be rednecks gone wrong. I can cite that evidence.

 

Just in case you forgot what you said.  Still waiting for the evadents.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

The tangential corollary you proffer is really intended to suggest that the opposite, "the presence of a firearm greatly increases the odds of a fatality by firearm" - and the data suggests that this isn't the case at all.   How many firearms are known to be in circulation in this country?  How many uses of those result in a fatality?  

Put another way - if we didn't have cars, nobody would have automobile accidents.  So - if we *really* want to reduce traffic fatalities, we ought to get rid of cars.  reductio ad absurdum.  

Except that it's not. You're proving my point, thanks.

What country has the most firearms per capita?

What country has the most firearm deaths, which country is having a horrific recurrence of mass shootings?

It's true that triggers don't pull themselves but in the absence of a firearm, you don't have people getting shot & killed. Simple.

Now the question is, how do you prevent people who should not have a gun from getting one? We have a lot of current laws and regulations about that very thing, they don't appear to be working as intended.

- DSK

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

Except that it's not. You're proving my point, thanks.

What country has the most firearms per capita?

What country has the most firearm deaths, which country is having a horrific recurrence of mass shootings?

It's true that triggers don't pull themselves but in the absence of a firearm, you don't have people getting shot & killed. Simple.

Now the question is, how do you prevent people who should not have a gun from getting one? We have a lot of current laws and regulations about that very thing, they don't appear to be working as intended.

- DSK

 

The bolded part really is the question, isn't it?   In all sincerity, aside from an outright ban on the existence of firearms, and a house-to-house search to confiscate every one in existence, I don't think that we can ever get to zero.   I think that we can do a lot better job at enforcing existing laws, and that the unlimited background checks and various red-flag proposals are the most effective changes that we could implement today.   

So - in your opinion, what are the biggest impediments to effective enforcement of existing laws? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

The bolded part really is the question, isn't it?   In all sincerity, aside from an outright ban on the existence of firearms, and a house-to-house search to confiscate every one in existence, I don't think that we can ever get to zero.   I think that we can do a lot better job at enforcing existing laws, and that the unlimited background checks and various red-flag proposals are the most effective changes that we could implement today.   

So - in your opinion, what are the biggest impediments to effective enforcement of existing laws? 

The gun lobby

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

The gun lobby stops the cops from enforcing existing laws?  Do tell.  

Let's see.... who runs the agency(ies) enforcing these laws? Local police departments, who are relatively isolated from the tentacles wrapped around 2 3/4 of the three gov't branches? Or is it Federal agencies who can be relied on to 1- suck up to Congress (and therefor lobbyists) for budget and 2- have to listen when a Congresscritter calls the office and says "blah blah do this or that."

So, yeah...... they do.

Kind of like your assertion that the number of guns has nothing to do with the prevalence of gun violence, this falls apart at the first rational factual look. What else ya got? How long before you accuse me of misquoting you?

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

Kind of like your assertion that the number of guns has nothing to do with the prevalence of gun violence, this falls apart at the first rational factual look. What else ya got? How long before you accuse me of misquoting you?

You just did.  Right there ^^

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

Let's see.... who runs the agency(ies) enforcing these laws? Local police departments, who are relatively isolated from the tentacles wrapped around 2 3/4 of the three gov't branches? Or is it Federal agencies who can be relied on to 1- suck up to Congress (and therefor lobbyists) for budget and 2- have to listen when a Congresscritter calls the office and says "blah blah do this or that."

So, yeah...... they do. - Perhaps we need to make sure we're both talking about the same thing.  I'm suggesting that current enforcement of existing statute, most of which occurs at the local level, isn't as effective as it can and should be.   You said that you think the "Gun Lobby" is the biggest impediment to enforcement of existing laws.  I don't see the connection - and I don't think that you've explained it in this comment. 

Kind of like your assertion that the number of guns has nothing to do with the prevalence of gun violence, this falls apart at the first rational factual look. What else ya got? How long before you accuse me of misquoting you?

My assertion was that your suggestion that the number of guns in circulation wasn't the causal factor that you asserted, as evidenced by the minute percentage of those that are ever used inappropriately. It's right above if you need to refresh your memory.  How long before you misquote me, or conflate my comments is up to you - I'm certainly not making anything up, I actually prefer a considerate conversation to the shit-flinging that often happens here. 

- DSK

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:
15 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

Let's see.... who runs the agency(ies) enforcing these laws? Local police departments, who are relatively isolated from the tentacles wrapped around 2 3/4 of the three gov't branches? Or is it Federal agencies who can be relied on to 1- suck up to Congress (and therefor lobbyists) for budget and 2- have to listen when a Congresscritter calls the office and says "blah blah do this or that."

So, yeah...... they do. -  ....     ...     ......

- Perhaps we need to make sure we're both talking about the same thing.  I'm suggesting that current enforcement of existing statute, most of which occurs at the local level, isn't as effective as it can and should be.   You said that you think the "Gun Lobby" is the biggest impediment to enforcement of existing laws.  I don't see the connection - and I don't think that you've explained it in this comment. 

OK, the only part of gun enforcement that I see placed on local police is: here in NC, the county sheriffs issue pistol permits before you can can buy one. Maybe they do a lot more that I don't know about?

Who carries out the background checks? What part does BATF play? I'm sure it has changed over the past fifteen years, when I not only dropped out of shooting sports but became highly .... shall we say, disenchanted..... with the mind set of gun enthusiasts in this country. So my knowledge of the system is limited and dated, but it still all operates under the same umbrella.

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Steam Flyer said:

OK, the only part of gun enforcement that I see placed on local police is: here in NC, the county sheriffs issue pistol permits before you can can buy one. Maybe they do a lot more that I don't know about?

Who carries out the background checks? What part does BATF play? I'm sure it has changed over the past fifteen years, when I not only dropped out of shooting sports but became highly .... shall we say, disenchanted..... with the mind set of gun enthusiasts in this country. So my knowledge of the system is limited and dated, but it still all operates under the same umbrella.

- DSK

Glad I asked the question, because I think we were talking about different things - I'm talking about enforcement of existing criminal statute, where locally known bad actors should be clipped.   You're talking about the framework around the permission to acquire guns. In that context - I understand your comment.  
To your question RE the BATF - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Instant_Criminal_Background_Check_System 

It's wiki - but, my quick perusal found nothing that was glaringly contrary to my understanding of how the process works.   One thing I did find surprising was that the statutes governing intrastate firearms transfers weren't federal, but state laws. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

OK, the only part of gun enforcement that I see placed on local police is: here in NC, the county sheriffs issue pistol permits before you can can buy one. Maybe they do a lot more that I don't know about?

Who carries out the background checks? What part does BATF play? I'm sure it has changed over the past fifteen years, when I not only dropped out of shooting sports but became highly .... shall we say, disenchanted..... with the mind set of gun enthusiasts in this country. So my knowledge of the system is limited and dated, but it still all operates under the same umbrella.

- DSK

But that’s NOT what most of us mean my lax enforcement of existing gun laws.  We are (or at least I am) talking about enforcing existing gun laws such as convicted criminals can’t have a gun.  Yet, crims in Chicago and many other inner cities are constantly back on the street to commit violent crime after violent crime with little more than a slap on the wrist.  The justice system has become a revolving door and a training ground for violent criminals.  The NRA had fuck all to do with that.  You can thank the duopoly drug war for that. If those shitbags were still behind bars, they couldn’t get a gun - legally or illegally and the rights of law abiding citizens wouldn’t have to be trampled on order to save a few lives.  

Furthermore, it is the Libbyruls (as you so fondly call them) who insist on perfect privacy rights for the mentally ill.  Can’t stigmatize them and call them dangerous, or it might hurt their feelings.  Never mind that most of the recent mass shooters - from Newtown to the Parkland shootings all were from known mentally unstable and dangerous kids.  NO ONE was surprised when they did it. No one.  You can thank the love of your precious 4th and 5th Amendments for all those deaths.  

Hey if if saves just one child, right?

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

Glad I asked the question, because I think we were talking about different things - I'm talking about enforcement of existing criminal statute, where locally known bad actors should be clipped.   You're talking about the framework around the permission to acquire guns. In that context - I understand your comment.  
To your question RE the BATF - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Instant_Criminal_Background_Check_System 

It's wiki - but, my quick perusal found nothing that was glaringly contrary to my understanding of how the process works.   One thing I did find surprising was that the statutes governing intrastate firearms transfers weren't federal, but state laws. 

I think there is a whole lot that could be tightened up wrt to the Federal BGC system.  I’ve said it here many times.  Better information sharing among states and LE agencies would be a great start,  Just like we did for intel sharing in the wake of 9/11.  Too much stuff is Stovepiped.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Shootist Jeff said:

I think there is a whole lot that could be tightened up wrt to the Federal BGC system.  I’ve said it here many times.  Better information sharing among states and LE agencies would be a great start,  Just like we did for intel sharing in the wake of 9/11.  Too much stuff is Stovepiped.

 

One of the biggest deficiencies, IMHO, is the lack of standardization in tracking/reporting mental health issues, and with that, the associated inability to share commonly accepted diagnoses between states and federal agencies.  With the increased granularity of definitions presented in ICD-10, it seems to me to be a simple exercise in documentation and sharing to delineate a list of disqualifying conditions, and then to share awareness of who has those disqualifying conditions.  

Improving the efficacy of background checks, requiring them for every SALE of a firearm ( I shouldn't be required to hand a dogballs to a neighbor kid to go plink in my backyard), coupled with the implementation of properly constrained red flag laws would make an immediate, positive impact without infringing upon anyone who's personal behavior didn't warrant that infringement. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

One of the biggest deficiencies, IMHO, is the lack of standardization in tracking/reporting mental health issues, and with that, the associated inability to share commonly accepted diagnoses between states and federal agencies.  With the increased granularity of definitions presented in ICD-10, it seems to me to be a simple exercise in documentation and sharing to delineate a list of disqualifying conditions, and then to share awareness of who has those disqualifying conditions.  

Improving the efficacy of background checks, requiring them for every SALE of a firearm ( I shouldn't be required to hand a dogballs to a neighbor kid to go plink in my backyard), coupled with the implementation of properly constrained red flag laws would make an immediate, positive impact without infringing upon anyone who's personal behavior didn't warrant that infringement. 

Yep

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

Fuck me. They want Big Government to track everyones mental health instead of tracking Guns.

Why not, there are far more gunz out there than crazies.  Seems more efficient.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

Now the question is, how do you prevent people who should not have a gun from getting one? We have a lot of current laws and regulations about that very thing, they don't appear to be working as intended.

It's been done right here in the USA, as mentioned elsewhere...

On 6/18/2019 at 5:26 AM, Repastinate Tom said:

Brief amici curiae of National Sheriffs Association, et al. filed.
 

Quote

 

One cannot even possess a handgun in New York City without going through an extraordinarily long, costly, intrusive, and discretionary licensing process. See Part II.B., below. There are several types of carry licenses in addition to the premises license at issue here. According to public records obtained by the New York Times, there are about 37,000 licensed individuals and nearly 4,000 of those have carry licenses. Jo Craven McGinty, The Rich, the Famous, the Armed, NEW YORK TIMES (Feb. 18, 2011).4 These licensees do not include the 14,602 retired police officers who are licensed to have a handgun. Id. Thus, if things have not changed drastically over the past few years, there are something like 33,000 civilian premises license-holders in the city.

The Census Bureau estimates New York City’s population to be 8,398,748 as of July 1, 2018.6 In the most recent census, 79% of the city’s residents were 18 years old or older. Applying that percentage to the 2018 data, there are currently about 6,635,010 adults in the city. Thus, based on the number of premises licenses referenced above, less than one-half of one percent of adults in New York City can legally possess a handgun at home under a premises license. Even members of this tiny minority are forbidden by the Rule to transport their handguns outside the home except to a range in the city or while hunting in designated areas of New York State.7 The only individuals who can carry or transport their handguns outside the home without those limitations are those 4,000 individuals with carry permits, who constitute only .0006 of the adult population of the city.

 


You just make sure it's burdensome and expensive to get a gun and also make sure that even people who do have money must also have political connections for the "discretionary" part and you can make sure that only a handful of people in a city of millions have guns. Legally, I mean.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/23/2019 at 7:08 AM, Shootist Jeff said:

ach is eJust in case you forgot what you said.  Still waiting for the evadents.  

Look more closely. I re-posted the DV figure a few days ago for you. BTW the info from both  Huffpo and Everytown now say that 54% to 57% of the mass murders are domestic.

SCAPEGOAT  AWAY, but the majority of mass murders are not gang related. The majority are not drug related. Actually, many if the  DV dustups are alcohol related, and exacerbated by gun mentality and gun presence.

 

Don't bother asking for this info a fourth or fifth time Jeffie.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, chinabald said:
On 8/23/2019 at 3:38 PM, Steam Flyer said:

Not every crazy person will kill somebody.

Every gun can

 

Will vs Can??? 

Not every gun will kill somebody 

but every crazy person can

Sounds pretty dumb doesn’t it. 

Yes, your version is kinda dumb.

It's blatantly and obviously not true.

Look at who agrees with you and see if you like riding on the same bus with them.

- DSK

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

If you like him you ca't be my friend!!!! 

It's identity politics: who are you? Who do you hate?

If you love guns and hate gays & brown people, then you have an obvious choice. OTOH if you want to pretend to be smart and make up "logic" statements, and try to run a large complex operation on the basis of "who do you hate" plus the illogic, what is going to happen?

It's a shame that this is how one group chooses the people they want to make decisions for the country. It's a bigger shame that it's been so successful that they've become the model for anybody who wants to succeed in politics.

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

It's identity politics: who are you? Who do you hate?

If you love guns and hate gays & brown people, then you have an obvious choice. OTOH if you want to pretend to be smart and make up "logic" statements, and try to run a large complex operation on the basis of "who do you hate" plus the illogic, what is going to happen?

It's a shame that this is how one group chooses the people they want to make decisions for the country. It's a bigger shame that it's been so successful that they've become the model for anybody who wants to succeed in politics.

- DSK

I try not to do identity politics.    I don't always succeed in ignoring the jabs from folks who's intent is just to piss me off - but, I do make an effort. 

If I've got a point, I try to make it.  if it can't stand on its own, that gives me reason to reconsider it.  I try to consider ideas and opinions based upon the idea or opinion that's expressed, and to not evaluate it based upon its author.    IMHO, there are too many in positions of authority today who don't do that and should - nobody's got an exclusive on good ideas or consideration. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there really a debate... or is just liberals throwing another temper tantrum until they get their way....say.... The Great Society and all it’s offshoot programs and Federal Departments have be cost effective colossal FAILURE S 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Fakenews said:

5 dead (as of now) per presser so it qualifies as a mass shooting for Tomghoul.  He’s busy sending T&P’s.


People who pay attention know that if four are injured, that's a mass shooting. It's useful for posts like this one:

6 hours ago, Shortforbob said:

People seemingly only pay attention when the victims are random and there's multiple deaths.

the facts are there's been more mass shootings in 2019 than days in the year. Most don't make national news.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_United_States_in_2019

Don't include me in your generalization. I've posted T's n P's of DOING SOMETHING repeatedly in response to (mostly stupid drug war) "mass" shootings that you have ignored.

Why do you ignore them?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/24/2019 at 3:21 AM, Shootist Jeff said:

Look steamy, lets cut to brass tacks here and knock off this silly tit for tat bickering. You and your elk desperately want gunz gone as you think that is the only way to lesson your (false BTW) perception that gun murder is on the rise and is the existential threat to our society.  Do I have that right?

I will stipulate here for the record that YES, reducing the number of guns in society will likely reduce the numbers of ‘gun deaths’.  Duh, if there are no gunz, its sort of hard to shoot someone or yourself.  It’s like arguing there would be no online pedophiles or online human trafficking if there was no internet. But neither of those problems would disappear.  Ever.  

But I will also submit that the US has a violence problem and that if you took away the guns with @jocal505‘s giant sky magnet - Americans would still find ways to kill each other in significant numbers.  At least until you end the WOD and address the economic inequality issues.  But we’ll leave that argument aside for the moment.  What you want above is fantasy for several reasons.  

Reason #1 is FUCK YOU, 2nd Amendment!  Yes, amendments can be changed or abolished.  But this one isn’t.  Not anytime soon.  Certainly not in our lifetimes.  Not even in that snot-nosed brat Miss jib’s lifetime.  Its just not going to happen and you are wasting your breath and brain cells thinking it can and will be.

Reason #2 is FUCK YOU, 4th Amendment!  There are over 350 million guns in this country.  Even IF by some fantastical turn of events you could get around the 2A - to make it have any teeth, you would need to suspend the 4th as well.  House to house searches to verify all those boating accidents.  The cost of that alone is mind boggling.  The thought of even trying to do that is even more mind boggling.  If you think the War on Drugs is a failed debacle, wait until you start the War on Gunz.  You ain’t seen nuthin yet.  

Reason #3 is simply that guns have been and are a part of our society.  The FF’s were very clear and deliberate about why they wanted it included in the BoRs and it was a very prominent feature of both they and the states ratifying it.  And whether you like it or not, the need for it has not lessened from 1787.  In fact I would argue its more relevant now than ever since the CW.  Yeah, I know..... blah blah blah Jet fighters and tanks and aircraft carriers and nukes.  But over and over again throughout history - numerous armed insurgencies fighting on their home soil has very successfully not only held off superpowers but soundly defeated them.  The American Colonials themselves were our first successful example.  But other classic examples of an armed populace with little more than small arms and IEDs kicking a superpower’s ass are:  The N Ireland Troubles, Viet Cong vs France and the US,, the Mujahideen vs the Soviets in Afghanistan, Iraqi Sunnis vs US, Taliban vs US, and many more.  Yes, eventually ALL of those examples - even the US colonials - got outside help and funding and arms.  But they started with what they had - i.e. weapons among the populace while the other superpowers or interested parties sat back to see how viable they were before they covertly or overtly stepped into support them.  Anyway, the point is that the 2A is just as, if not more, relevant now than back when it was written.  Especially in light of trump and his potential successors.  Some smart people wrote this:

Quote

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

Never say never......

Anyway, lets just agree to disagree that the idea of taking all the guns, or even severely reducing them or restricting them is just never going to happen.  Not anytime soon.  So now what?  The only answer to that is to start listening to some sane voices who are and have been saying that the only way to reduce to the slaughter is to do what’s in the realm of the possible.  Enforce the existing laws better and more vigorously.  Better Background checks, Red Flag laws, address the WOD, address the mental health issues, address the ease with with people can become radicalized on social media and spread hate, address the economic inequality issues.  None of those policies would impact the 150 million law abiding gun-owning citizens who are not out there shooting up schools.  But the idea of confiscating 350 million guns in current circulation would certainly impact them as well as the other 200 million when their privacy and due process rights are trampled in order to stop a tiny fraction of the deaths everyday related to gunz.  

But the fact of the matter is this abolitionist stance is doing more harm than good in advancing the common cause of reducing deaths.  Every day you and your elk herd talk about doing the pusstralia SOLution, the more you make it impossible to have a reasonable conversation.  And if enacted will turn out exactly like all the other abolitionist policies we’ve tried.  It didn’t work out well for booze and it hasn’t worked out well for drugs.  But yet you want to try the same thing again???  Wow, OK.  Al Einstein is laughing at you mumbling something about the definition of insanity.

Just saying.......

@Steam Flyer, I posted this to you a while back, took the time to try to try to actually write out something detailed and from the heart.  Not sure if you just never saw this or ignored it because I make too much logical sense and you would be hard pressed to debunk any of it.  I suspect the latter.....

Just saying.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

@Steam Flyer, I posted this to you a while back, took the time to try to try to actually write out something detailed and from the heart.  Not sure if you just never saw this or ignored it because I make too much logical sense and you would be hard pressed to debunk any of it.  I suspect the latter.....

Just saying.

I consider it a long rambling mess on the same level as Undignified Tom's entire threads of talking to himself.

Far from "making too much sense," you start out by assuming you can read the other guy's mind... the rest of it isn't worth reading

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

I consider it a long rambling mess on the same level as Undignified Tom's entire threads of talking to himself.

Far from "making too much sense," you start out by assuming you can read the other guy's mind... the rest of it isn't worth reading

- DSK

I see.  So you didn't bother to read it.  The only person's mind I'm reading is my own.  These are MY stances and MY opinions.  Unlike you and your elk, I'm am not trying to imagine what you think and feel.  But because you didn't bother to read it, you continue to not have a fucking clue about what I think, because its easier for you to assign your own biases and IMAGINE! to what you assume I must thing.  

Noted and so typical.......

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Shootist Jeff said:

I see.  So you didn't bother to read it.  The only person's mind I'm reading is my own.  These are MY stances and MY opinions.  Unlike you and your elk, I'm am not trying to imagine what you think and feel.  But because you didn't bother to read it, you continue to not have a fucking clue about what I think, because its easier for you to assign your own biases and IMAGINE! to what you assume I must thing.  

Noted and so typical.......

We all know what you think Jeffreaux.  You’re not an enigma.

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Fakenews said:
1 hour ago, Shootist Jeff said:

I see.  So you didn't bother to read it.  The only person's mind I'm reading is my own.  These are MY stances and MY opinions.  Unlike you and your elk, I'm am not trying to imagine what you think and feel.  But because you didn't bother to read it, you continue to not have a fucking clue about what I think, because its easier for you to assign your own biases and IMAGINE! to what you assume I must thing.  

Noted and so typical.......

We all know what you think Jeffreaux.  You’re not an enigma.

Well hellz bellz, Gaytor...... that's fascinating.  Tell me, what am I thinking about now?

Link to post
Share on other sites