Jump to content

Hey, Gun Nuts, This Is On You!


Jules

Recommended Posts

I don't know if it's your paranoia, if guns make you feel empowered or whatever other problem you have that compels you to go ballistic every time someone suggests sensible gun laws. 

What I do know is your fanaticism has armed the psychos. 

These mass shootings are on YOU!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 246
  • Created
  • Last Reply
2 minutes ago, Jules said:

I don't know if it's your paranoia, if guns make you feel empowered or whatever other problem you have that compels you to go ballistic every time someone suggests sensible gun laws. 

What I do know is your fanaticism has armed the psychos. 

These mass shootings are on YOU!

You have to give Trump some credit for El Paso with all his negative immigrants rhetoric (bad hombres, rapists, etc).  There is blood on his small hands and probably some shit under the fingernails.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Jules said:

I don't know if it's your paranoia, if guns make you feel empowered or whatever other problem you have that compels you to go ballistic every time someone suggests sensible gun laws. 

What I do know is your fanaticism has armed the psychos. 

These mass shootings are on YOU!

Gun owner here. Never shot at a Mexican. Hysteria doesn't help much Cap. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Blue Crab said:

Gun owner here. Never shot at a Mexican. Hysteria doesn't help much Cap. 

Hi there BC. You are a blind one when it comes to spotting rampant race-baiting. When you face years of it, you see none.

And you consider yourself a highbrow, quite upscale, pretty far up on the food chain.

Gun owner too.

What''s up with this combo?

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

What "reasonable" gun laws would have stopped these two latest incidents?  NO indication has come out so far that either of the perps obtained their gun illegally and without a background check.  

Not prevented, but a 10 round limit on mags sure would have mitigated the damage.  I don't see the need for a 30 round or larger mag other than to kill people more efficiently.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

If I were a democratic strategist, I'd actually suggest the following:

1)  Pass a federal law requiring that all States have militias that are open to all citizens of those states.

2)  Any particular rules of membership in said militias would be the purview of the states to establish and maintain and should not violate the constitution or any amendments thereof.

3)  Block Grant money to those states for the support and operation of those militias including money for background checks, mental health evaluation AND  treatment, training and safety, competitions, etc.  Medicaid model for the 2nd amendment.

4)  Ban the possession, sale, or purchase of any detachable magazine by anyone not in the militia.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Left Shift said:

Well, owning a gun certainly doesn't help either.  

I'm with Jeff. New restrictions are not desirable but OK as soon as we've utilized all the laws we currently have now. What I know for sure is with 100M and counting weapons on the street, nutcases will be able to find one. Banning weapons just opens up a new black market. Win win for the bad guys. 

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

Yep, that's going to win your side a lot of support from gun owners.  

You've got me curious now......  how are these shootings "on me"?  I've never gone ballistic over "reasonable gun law" suggestions.  I've made many myself.  

What "reasonable" gun laws would have stopped these two latest incidents?  NO indication has come out so far that either of the perps obtained their gun illegally and without a background check.  

According to Miss Jiblet it’s on me as well.

http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/index.php?/topic/209954-what-a-gorgeous-day-for-a-bloodbath/&do=findComment&comment=6678559

Its impossible to try and hold a reasoned discussion, that in itself is unreasonable behaviour apparently, made even worse when I mentioned that I have no interest in following Toms discussion. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Blue Crab said:

I'm with Jeff. New restrictions are not desirable but OK as soon as we've utilized all the laws we currently have now. What I know for sure is with 100M and counting weapons on the street, nutcases will be able to find one. Banning weapons just opens up a new black market. Win win for the bad guys. 

Short answer- "I prefer my big swinging dick, dead shoppers and kids so lets do nothing"

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Leeroy Jenkins said:

If anyone on this site has a manifesto of their own, it's MJ for sure.  

That’s not a manifesto, that’s just screaming abuse at any and everyone that has even the slightest difference of experience or opinion. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, toad said:

Short answer- "I prefer my big swinging dick, dead shoppers and kids so lets do nothing"

Why bother to quote me if you''re going to make up what I might say? 

We've all gone round and round on this issue far too many times to continue to throw hysterical crap around. You boys need to come up with an answer that actually affects the nutjobs, rather than responsible owners.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Blue Crab said:

Jocelyn, you are an ignorant twat. Go take yer meds ya crazy fuck.

Kudos to Fake News for ownership of the first sentence above. Should have been in quotes. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Blue Crab said:

Why bother to quote me if you''re going to make up what I might say? 

We've all gone round and round on this issue far too many times to continue to throw hysterical crap around. You boys need to come up with an answer that actually affects the nutjobs, rather than responsible owners.

 

Got that one kind of bass-ackwards, doncha?

How long do you expect this to continue before some populist politician(s) decide to make hay with the trembling masses, and take away yer Precious?

I've said for years that "responsible gun owners" need to get out in front of this, or will end up losing.

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Blue Crab said:

I would welcome some populists politicians making some changes to our entire system. We desperately need it. 

Before change you need consent. This isn't going to be something fixed in a few months.

I'd suggest either a national survey, posted (registered) to every household in the USA.( we did it for same sex marriage).like a census or something in the next federal election.

tick yes/no boxes for all options then you'll get the mood for what's acceptable and what isn't by the national majority.

work it from there.

It might take committee's and years but at least you'd have something concrete to start work with.

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

Yep, that's going to win your side a lot of support from gun owners. 

Blah blah blah.

Gun owners are supporting your boy Shitstain.  Nothing is going to reach y'all.

image.png.9a51b01ec0d08c707e2833e0b5be0eec.png

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Olsonist said:

Gun owners are supporting your boy Shitstain.

You mean they don't support people who consistently put forth bills to ban firearms? Imagine that. I'll bet pro-abortion democrats don't support pro-life politicians as well.

Are you new to how this works? Your posts often seem to indicate that you are.

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

You mean they don't support people who consistently put forth bills to ban firearms? Imagine that. I'll bet pro-abortion democrats don't support pro-life politicians as well.

Are you new to how this works? Your posts often seem to indicate that you are.

As I said, nothing is going to reach y'all.

Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Blue Crab said:

I would welcome some populists politicians making some changes to our entire system. We desperately need it. 

OTOH I kinda like the Constitution the way it is, or at least, the way it used to be applied.

Of course that requires voters to vote, elected officials to represent the people who elected them, and some modicum of sense all around.

Note- I am not holding my breath

- DSK

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

4trj4okkhhe31.png

 

Neil deGrasse Tyson must have posted that while being tasered. I find it hard to believe that he did not consider that people with even a tiny modicum of basic humanity will know the difference between tragedies that occur in nature and tragedies that result from pure evil.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I love how the US gun lover wants to have a reasoned rational debate on what other excuses can be used to ensure that their precious rights aren’t infringed whilst you murder each other in your local communities.

But as long as you can go on an Internet forum and say you’re all got great ideas on how to mitigate the issue, then calmly sit back and do fuck all about your great ideas.

until the next mass shooting. Then you can all say you’ve got great ideas , and calmly sit back and.....

The local college just canned a trip for their senior kids to the US and have opted for Europe . They’re concerned the racial diversity of the kids that are going will cause problems and that the parents will sue the fuck out of  the college for ‘knowingly’ exposing the kids to violence.

Go USA.

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

I love how the US gun lover wants to have a reasoned rational debate on what other excuses can be used to ensure that their precious rights aren’t infringed whilst you murder each other in your local communities.

But as long as you can go on an Internet forum and say you’re all got great ideas on how to mitigate the issue, then calmly sit back and do fuck all about your great ideas.

until the next mass shooting. Then you can all say you’ve got great ideas , and calmly sit back and.....

The local college just canned a trip for their senior kids to the US and have opted for Europe . They’re concerned the racial diversity of the kids that are going will cause problems and that the parents will sue the fuck out of  the college for ‘knowingly’ exposing the kids to violence.

Go USA.

Gloria Steinem has it dialed in, I'm just not sure if the gun crazies will buy it.

image.png.5778bda4e3f6523e06921ca7db15b75d.png

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

Gloria Steinem has it dialed in, I'm just not sure if the gun crazies will buy it.

image.png.5778bda4e3f6523e06921ca7db15b75d.png

You don’t really need abortions,  the population control is courtesy of the NRA as evadent.

Chicago had a great weekend too, 47 shot, 5 fatally according to Huffpost.

Pretty soon no ones gonna want to go to the US anywhere it’s too screwed up.

How is that winning feeling?

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Troglodytarum said:

4trj4okkhhe31.png

While Mr. Tyson takes a very pragmatic view of the universe, he also avoids a key argument here through the use of statistics.  We do what we can not to make medical errors.  (Trust me - hospitals don't like to be sued).  We do what we can to fight the flu.  We do some minimal amount to address mental health.  Same for car accidents - see air bags and seat belts and crumple zones.  We have a clear set of laws around homicide, etc.

But we continue to do very little surrounding the identification and policing of guns.

Perhaps it's the lack of effort that upsets so many.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Walmart sells guns ( which is always a surprise to me)

Texas allows people to carry guns in public places - hidden or otherwise

3,000 people in the store

how many were carrying?

How many were good people with guns who thought they would have a go at the shooter with their saturday night specials?

The El Paso man shot people and then waited for the coppers to turn up- ( was also wearing ear defenders to protect his hearing while killing people)

the Dayton man only had 30 seconds to kill people and got a  lot in a short time before the coppers got him

your guns laws look weird to me - the gun nuts on this forum also seem to love their guns the way my labrador loves her bone - she fondles it, she licks it, she sniffs it, she  carries it around, she shows it to people and then takes it away from them.

 

Dylan

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, badlatitude said:

Gloria Steinem has it dialed in, I'm just not sure if the gun crazies will buy it.

image.png.5778bda4e3f6523e06921ca7db15b75d.png

I tend to support gun ownership, but this is an excellent argument about where our priorities lay.  Of course, guns are a religion unto themselves, so it's not surprising.

Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Troglodytarum said:

61uH+Ob9FBL._SX425_.jpg

that is a great idea

design a gun that will lick you back

Dylan

 

PS my lab is a bitch - and is trained not to lick people - that is pretty disgusting as she is very undisciplined when it comes to eating

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

 

But to answer your question this walmart was literally adjacent to juarez, mexico and the majority of the shoppers were mexicans shopping for the 72 hours/25 mile limit.  Of course they can't bring firearms when they visit.

Also, there are about 1 million carry licenses in texas in a population of about 28 million. Not to mention El Paso is a liberal, non gun favoring stronghold.  I'm sure you can do the math.

 

ah, is that why he drove so far...found somewhere in Texas where there's lots of mexican day shoppers and not many guns...I wondered how he survived.

What a cowardly POS...didn't even want to risk martyrdom for his cause and is prolly so stupid he thinks because he's white and it's Texas he'll walk.

 

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

ah, is that why he drove so far...found somewhere in Texas where there's lots of mexican day shoppers and not many guns...I wondered how he survived.

What a cowardly POS...didn't even want to risk martyrdom for his cause and is prolly so stupid he thinks because he's white and it's Texas he'll walk.

 

I suspect he's in for a rather rude awakening............

Quote

Capital punishment is a legal penalty in the state of Texas, part of the United States.

In 1982, the state became the first jurisdiction in the world to carry out an execution by lethal injection, when it put to death Charles Brooks Jr.. It was the first execution in the state since 1964.

Texas, which is the second most populous state of the Union, has executed 561 offenders from the U.S. capital punishment resumption in 1976 (beginning in 1982 with the Brooks execution) to April 24, 2019 (the execution of John William King), more than a third of the national total.[1]

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

failing that, he won't last that long inside anyway

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, badlatitude said:

Gloria Steinem has it dialed in, I'm just not sure if the gun crazies will buy it.

image.png.5778bda4e3f6523e06921ca7db15b75d.png

A lot of that is already in place. Makes me wonder how much folks really understand about what laws exist today. The only gun control that will make a real substantial difference is repealing the 2nd amendment. Maybe magazine capacity limits could have some impact, not enough to impact overall gun crime stats, but possibly within the subset of mass shootings like El Paso and Dayton. UBC might help a little, but only if folks work together to craft laws that make some sense and don't result in the SC tossing them out. Still, our gun crime will always be out of line with other countries unless we repeal the 2nd and force a "buyback" of existing guns. 

And as to the OP, no there is absolutely nothing about the tragic shootings over the weekend which is "on me". It is this type of rhetoric which shuts down any rational discussion. 

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

A lot of that is already in place. Makes me wonder how much folks really understand about what laws exist today. The only gun control that will make a real substantial difference is repealing the 2nd amendment. Maybe magazine capacity limits could have some impact, not enough to impact overall gun crime stats, but possibly within the subset of mass shootings like El Paso and Dayton. UBC might help a little, but only if folks work together to craft laws that make some sense and don't result in the SC tossing them out. Still, our gun crime will always be out of line with other countries unless we repeal the 2nd and force a "buyback" of existing guns. 

And as to the OP, no there is absolutely nothing about the tragic shootings over the weekend which is "on me". It is this type of rhetoric which shuts down any rational discussion. 

I've been trying to point out that reasonable discussion from all sides is needed to find a set of solutions to this to little avail.  Simple name calling and blaming achieves nothing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This US gun thing is getting so fucked up that I have changed my attitude towards it.  I now see it as completely intractable.  I once thought that there was some hope but PA has informed me, educated me, Americans are different and haunted by their slave days and matching violent past that is a stinking albatross around their necks.  The country is fucked, the system has entered a malignant stage IV and there is no turning back.

adult-man-in-bathrobe-sitting-on-chair-a

If I wake up tomorrow morning, get a coffee, check the news and see that a Rwandan style genocide has broken out in the streets of America, I will say to myself "As if we didn't see that coming" and take the dog for a walk.

No more fucks do I give.

 

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

I've been trying to point out that reasonable discussion from all sides is needed to find a set of solutions to this to little avail.  Simple name calling and blaming achieves nothing.

"little avail"

nice phrase....

T and P all round chaps

 

the gun lickers demand respectful debate..... otherwise they are not talking to no-one about nuffink

bit like the racists telling libs not to call them racists otherwise they will stop being "nice"

 

good one

 

Dylan

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

This US gun thing is getting so fucked up that I have changed my attitude towards it.  I now see it as completely intractable.  I once thought that there was some hope but PA has informed me, educated me, Americans are different and haunted by their slave days and matching violent past that is a stinking albatross around their necks.  The country is fucked, the system has entered a malignant stage IV and there is no turning back.

adult-man-in-bathrobe-sitting-on-chair-a

If I wake up tomorrow morning, get a coffee, check the news and see that a Rwandan style genocide has broken out in the streets of America, I will say to myself "As if we didn't see that coming" and take the dog for a walk.

No more fucks do I give.

 

you are quite difficult to deal with, mate

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

You've got me curious now......  how are these shootings "on me"?  I've never gone ballistic over "reasonable gun law" suggestions.  I've made many myself. 

If you identify as a gun nut, then yes, it's on you. 

Gun nuts are the ones who show up at funerals of kids shot to death and hold their bullshit 2nd Amendment signs.  Gun nuts are the ones who claim mass shootings are fake news.  And gun nuts are the ones who threaten their elected officials with removal and follow the gun lobby's marching orders every time they vote.

These are the fanatics who are preventing their whore politicians from voting in sensible gun laws.  And they are the ones keeping their whore politicians in office.  A gun to them is "My Precious."

Every one of these senseless deaths is on them.  If this describes you, these deaths are on you, too. 

17 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

Yep, that's going to win your side a lot of support from gun owners. 

Gun nuts are a hopeless cause.  They have proven they can't be reasoned with.  We are long past trying.  They don't deserve a place at the table.  They deserve a place in the psychiatrist's chair.  They have serious mental health issues and should be treated accordingly.

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

Yep, that's going to win your side a lot of support from gun owners.  

You've got me curious now......  how are these shootings "on me"?  I've never gone ballistic over "reasonable gun law" suggestions.  I've made many myself.  

What "reasonable" gun laws would have stopped these two latest incidents?  NO indication has come out so far that either of the perps obtained their gun illegally and without a background check.  

Reasonable gun laws can at least begin to move the needle in our gun culture away from this "cold dead hands" bullshit.  Doing nothing has gotten exactly what one would expect.  Nothing.  Until gun owners quit the backwards tough guy 2nd Amendment act this will keep happening.

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

If you identify as a gun nut, then yes, it's on you. 

Gun nuts are the ones who show up at funerals of kids shot to death and hold their bullshit 2nd Amendment signs.  Gun nuts are the ones who claim mass shootings are fake news.  And gun nuts are the ones who threaten their elected officials with removal and follow the gun lobby's marching orders every time they vote.

These are the fanatics who are preventing their whore politicians from voting in sensible gun laws.  And they are the ones keeping their whore politicians in office.  A gun to them is "My Precious."

Every one of these senseless deaths is on them.  If this describes you, these deaths are on you, too. 

Gun nuts are a hopeless cause.  They have proven they can't be reasoned with.  We are long past trying.  They don't deserve a place at the table.  They deserve a place in the psychiatrist's chair.  They have serious mental health issues and should be treated accordingly.

You seem to be defining 'gun nut' in a way that is unique to you and then expecting everyone to understand what you mean by it. The majority here and elsewhere has a much more inclusive definition of gun nut, one which would include folks like me. And no, I do not have a serious mental health issue. Your language also implies that you are part of the problem when it comes to treating serious mental illness, your language is stigmatizing mental illness and those who suffer from it.  

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

I've been trying to point out that reasonable discussion from all sides is needed to find a set of solutions to this to little avail.  Simple name calling and blaming achieves nothing.

I question whether most folks really want to achieve anything more than the rush of dopamine they get when someone responds to them online, with a like, or a downvote, or a retort, or support. There are not two sides, there are hundreds of millions of unique perspectives. That is something which seems to be missed by many.

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Jules said:

If you identify as a gun nut, then yes, it's on you. 

Gun nuts are the ones who show up at funerals of kids shot to death and hold their bullshit 2nd Amendment signs.  Gun nuts are the ones who claim mass shootings are fake news.  And gun nuts are the ones who threaten their elected officials with removal and follow the gun lobby's marching orders every time they vote.

These are the fanatics who are preventing their whore politicians from voting in sensible gun laws.  And they are the ones keeping their whore politicians in office.  A gun to them is "My Precious."

Every one of these senseless deaths is on them.  If this describes you, these deaths are on you, too. 

Gun nuts are a hopeless cause.  They have proven they can't be reasoned with.  We are long past trying.  They don't deserve a place at the table.  They deserve a place in the psychiatrist's chair.  They have serious mental health issues and should be treated accordingly.

He's not making this up folks.

Last night on the news, there was a brief set of interviews with some of the families of past mass shooting victims. They're being harassed constantly by calls, emails, packages at the front door, etc etc, by threats, demands that they publish statements to the effect "it didn't really happen", etc etc.

It's like the Westboro Baptist Church people, do they deserve input on national policy? I say, no.

- DSK

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, LenP said:

You seem to be defining 'gun nut' in a way that is unique to you and then expecting everyone to understand what you mean by it. The majority here and elsewhere has a much more inclusive definition of gun nut, one which would include folks like me. And no, I do not have a serious mental health issue. Your language also implies that you are part of the problem when it comes to treating serious mental illness, your language is stigmatizing mental illness and those who suffer from it.  

I doubt it's unique.  The conversations I hear point out the very same traits I mentioned when defining gun nuts.  They are called nuts for a reason.  They are nuts.

But maybe the problem is reasonable gun owners come to the rescue of the gun nuts every time there's talk of changing the gun laws.  And maybe instead of responding to complaints about gun nuts, and seeming to identify as one, responsible gun owners should make the distinction between themselves and the gun nuts.

And please don't try to spin this into me having a problem because I brought mental illness into the conversation.  Paranoia and the obsessive relationship gun nuts have with guns qualifies them as having some form of mental illness.

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

Last night on the news, there was a brief set of interviews with some of the families of past mass shooting victims. They're being harassed constantly by calls, emails, packages at the front door, etc etc, by threats, demands that they publish statements to the effect "it didn't really happen", etc etc.

If these people aren't mentally ill, I don't know who is.

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

Some of the families have gone off the rails politically taking their grief on the road.  I went to a event at my synagogue where several stoneman douglas parents spoke.   One parent actually lost a child and believe it or not, she was the one who the most intellectually honest.  The other two had kids in the school who weren't injured.  One was a laywer who's full time gig no getting paid to endorse gun control.  "I used to be a police officer, so I know all about guns and no one needs 30 rounds to kill a deer" Well, turns out he was a security guard before he went to law school.

Fuck off.  Anyone who has lost a child to a mass shooting has the right to do whatever the fuck they want.  You're Jewish?  My ass.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Troglodytarum said:

Did you even read my post?

Yes.  What synagogue and where?  Let me do a little fact checking.  Let me rephrase, any parent who has lost a child or had their children suffer the trauma of a mass shooting can do whatever the fuck they want.  

What purpose does a 100-round drum mag for an AR-15 serve?  The weapon was designed to kill and the big mag just makes it more efficient.  Someday I hope you find a brain that knows what empathy is.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Troglodytarum said:
18 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

...   ...   ... Last night on the news, there was a brief set of interviews with some of the families of past mass shooting victims. They're being harassed constantly by calls, emails, packages at the front door, etc etc, by threats, demands that they publish statements to the effect "it didn't really happen", etc etc.

...    ...    ...

Some of the families have gone off the rails politically taking their grief on the road.  I went to a event at my synagogue where several stoneman douglas parents spoke.   One parent actually lost a child and believe it or not, she was the one who was the most intellectually honest.  The other two had kids in the school who weren't injured.  One was a laywer who's full time gig no getting paid to endorse gun control.  "I used to be a police officer, so I know all about guns and no one needs 30 rounds to kill a deer" Well, turns out he was a security guard before he went to law school.

So you're on the side of the people threatening and harassing victims' families?

Gee, who would have guessed.

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites

So...

A large percentage of Americans believe Islam is to blame despite the nuts being few in number.

A large percentage of Americans disbelieve guns are to blame despite the nuts being few in number.

 

I'm chewing fucking hard but having trouble digesting this one.  

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The indigestion stems from looking at studies using 2015 data, a US citizen was 175 x more likely to die from a gun homicide (and that's not including suicides) than from terrorism.

It's just not logical.

   

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Troglodytarum said:
35 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

So you're on the side of the people threatening and harassing victims' families?

Gee, who would have guessed.

 

where did I say that?

However, people who use their own personal tragedies should not be granted immunity to criticism when they are advocating a political stance.  

This is kind of like President Trump refusing to condemn Nazis.

Not a lot of middle ground here.

Part of the deal of being a free country is that you can do a very wide range of things. When you choose to do despicable things, then that makes you a despicable person and the rest of us are correct in despising you.

One side or the other. You've picked your team, so now you just need to get comfortable with all the implications of it.

- DSK

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

One side or the other. You've picked your team, so now you just need to get comfortable with all the implications of it.

 

as have you.

You know what else I've done? I put my ass on the line for this country, and  took an oath to defend the US Constitution against all enemies.... not quite "foreign AND domestic" as in the President's oath of office.....

but you seem to not have a very clear idea about what this country is, what it stands for; and when you cheer for it's enemies, you should recognize what that means. The time for backpedaling away from being a domestic enemy is drawing to a close.

Your team is the one who built concentration camps for Americans. Let's see who ends up inhabiting them, shall we?

- DSK

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

Are you aware that there are people in this world that have a severe medical condition which causes them to be that way? My mother for instance is one of those people. She is a truck driver that has bad knees and a bad back from driving the truck but you probably do not care about that case either. Oh well I am not one of those people I am 6'4" 245lbs and I exercise every day. I would love to see you say something like to my mother in front of me. Probably never happen though you are probably just an internet tough guy. I doubt very seriously you would say that to someones face. Just my thought.What do you think. Oh I am sorry you probably do not have a brain. I on the other hand will be happy to buy you a plane ticket to come here and see if you have the nerve to say that to someone I know.

Are you aware that I'm a former karate instructor? Bring it, dick breath. I am generally polite to people in public because that is the correct way to behave, but I have knocked assholes out before and have a while to go before old age makes me give it up.

Does your mother have a severe medical condition that makes her believe in retarded political slogans? That makes her not just yell "FIRE!" in crowded theaters but bring a gas can? That seems to be what you're claiming.

President Trump and his fans are rapidly declaring themselves enemies of what the USA has been from 1776 to 2016. The rest of us will end up having more to say about that.

- DSK

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

Are you aware that there are people in this world that have a severe medical condition which causes them to be that way? My mother for instance is one of those people. She is a truck driver that has bad knees and a bad back from driving the truck but you probably do not care about that case either. Oh well I am not one of those people I am 6'4" 245lbs and I exercise every day. I would love to see you say something like to my mother in front of me. Probably never happen though you are probably just an internet tough guy. I doubt very seriously you would say that to someones face. Just my thought.What do you think. Oh I am sorry you probably do not have a brain. I on the other hand will be happy to buy you a plane ticket to come here and see if you have the nerve to say that to someone I know.

Sure.

image.png.8f331c2f900c93ab3be08086a9bdce51.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Cal20sailor said:

Let me rephrase, any parent who has lost a child or had their children suffer the trauma of a mass shooting can do whatever the fuck they want. 

My son was attending NIU when they had their turn.  As soon as I heard about it, I called him.  It went to voicemail.  It was over an hour before I heard from him.  He was okay.  But for that hour+, I wasn't.

I've been to the wakes of far too many children.  One was my best friend.  My son lost two of his best friends.  My daughter, her boyfriend.  None were from gun deaths but all were filled with a sadness and grief that can't be described.  You can't console the parents.  You can't explain it to the siblings.  You just have to be there when they need you.

If anyone lacks the empathy to understand this grief, then, as Cal said, just shut the fuck up!  These gun nuts are nuts because all they can think about is their precious guns.  If that's the case, KEEP IT TO YOURSELF!  Let the families mourn their loss, even if it means touring the country trying to find some way to fill the hole left in their hearts.

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

A lot of that is already in place. Makes me wonder how much folks really understand about what laws exist today. The only gun control that will make a real substantial difference is repealing the 2nd amendment. Maybe magazine capacity limits could have some impact, not enough to impact overall gun crime stats, but possibly within the subset of mass shootings like El Paso and Dayton. UBC might help a little, but only if folks work together to craft laws that make some sense and don't result in the SC tossing them out. Still, our gun crime will always be out of line with other countries unless we repeal the 2nd and force a "buyback" of existing guns. 

And as to the OP, no there is absolutely nothing about the tragic shootings over the weekend which is "on me". It is this type of rhetoric which shuts down any rational discussion. 

When I first started posting on this forum, I was drawn out to explain my position on guns. What I wrote, I used to stand by; I no longer claim it is a workable idea. I believed that we should start over, eliminate all of our poorly thought-out laws, and rewrite by convention, a set of laws that would work nationally. I thought it was a good idea, but we have moved past any chance of an agreement.

Eliminating the Second Amendment is a fools' errand. The Founders put it there for a reason and more than anything else, I think we should respect that. We should be concentrating on the elements that, at one time, made gun ownership respectable. The NRA is the single most damaging entity to gun ownership in this country. It has divided, it has created anger, even hate, it has promulgated additions to weapons that are destroying us from within, it has stomped on laws it didn't like, and it has pressured lawmakers from doing anything about it.

We need to restore respectability, education, and responsibility to gun ownership, You start by writing laws that require strong background checks which involve social media. You involve mental health professionals, to weed out people who should not own guns, and you educate, you get people in training programs where proper storage, handling, and use of firearms are stressed. You find responsible gun owners to supervise those programs so that lessons are learned and hard-learned lessons are transferred to new owners.

Last, we need to buy back all assault weapons, and high-capacity magazines. It will be a hard sell, but those tools have caused the greatest damage to our American reputation and self-respect. We also need to break the idea that a militia will save America. That time has passed. The thought of old fogies traipsing through the woods thinking they are doing good, have not seen what a laser-guided smart bomb will do to them.

Once we knock the crazies out of gun ownership, we just may be able to hold our heads high again. Tom will be by soon to criticize and add his folksy humor and worn-out library of previous statements, don't listen to him, his time has passed.

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

The indigestion stems from looking at studies using 2015 data, a US citizen was 175 x more likely to die from a gun homicide (and that's not including suicides) than from terrorism.

It's just not logical.

The gun nuts aren't logical.  They are paranoid, obsessive, fearful people.  They don't need more guns.  They need the help of a mental health professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Troglodytarum said:

4trj4okkhhe31.png

How many times has a US President called for hospitals to kill people?  How many times has a US President told his supporters to cause car crashes.  Now, how many US President have told their supporters to shoot immigrants?

When we see medical errors we create laws and oversight to correct the error.  When we have flu outbreaks, we wash out hands, give free flu shots to the needy and send sick employees home.  When car fatalities increase we mandated seat belts, airbags and traction control.  When large numbers of people die while at a concert, shopping or celebrating the joys of garlic at the hands of someone with high powered arsenals of assault weapons, we shrug.  See the differences?

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

I doubt it's unique.  The conversations I hear point out the very same traits I mentioned when defining gun nuts.  They are called nuts for a reason.  They are nuts.

But maybe the problem is reasonable gun owners come to the rescue of the gun nuts every time there's talk of changing the gun laws.  And maybe instead of responding to complaints about gun nuts, and seeming to identify as one, responsible gun owners should make the distinction between themselves and the gun nuts.

And please don't try to spin this into me having a problem because I brought mental illness into the conversation.  Paranoia and the obsessive relationship gun nuts have with guns qualifies them as having some form of mental illness.

I am not spinning it, the fact is that your language strongly implies that there is some shame in having a mental illness. It is that type of attitude which keeps people from getting treatment. Would you say that someone who has cancer "deserves" radiation or chemo? No, of course not, so when you use that language when talking about mental illness you should be aware of what you are doing and how close it is to the coded language that Trump and others use to make dark skinned immigrants out to be a lesser class of people.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Donald Trump, the de facto leader of the White Nationalist movement and lover of the NRA, has announced the fault of mass shootings lies with the Internet and social media. 

Finally, he admits his Internet tweets and the impact they have on social media are at fault.

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

When I first started posting on this forum, I was drawn out to explain my position on guns. What I wrote, I used to stand by; I no longer claim it is a workable idea. I believed that we should start over, eliminate all of our poorly thought-out laws, and rewrite by convention, a set of laws that would work nationally. I thought it was a good idea, but we have moved past any chance of an agreement.

Eliminating the Second Amendment is a fools' errand. The Founders put it there for a reason and more than anything else, I think we should respect that. We should be concentrating on the elements that, at one time, made gun ownership respectable. The NRA is the single most damaging entity to gun ownership in this country. It has divided, it has created anger, even hate, it has promulgated additions to weapons that are destroying us from within, it has stomped on laws it didn't like, and it has pressured lawmakers from doing anything about it.

We need to restore respectability, education, and responsibility to gun ownership, You start by writing laws that require strong background checks which involve social media. You involve mental health professionals, to weed out people who should not own guns, and you educate, you get people in training programs where proper storage, handling, and use of firearms are stressed. You find responsible gun owners to supervise those programs so that lessons are learned and hard-learned lessons are transferred to new owners.

Last, we need to buy back all assault weapons, and high-capacity magazines. It will be a hard sell, but those tools have caused the greatest damage to our American reputation and self-respect. We also need to break the idea that a militia will save America. That time has passed. The thought of old fogies traipsing through the woods thinking they are doing good, have not seen what a laser-guided smart bomb will do to them.

Once we knock the crazies out of gun ownership, we just may be able to hold our heads high again. Tom will be by soon to criticize and add his folksy humor and worn-out library of previous statements, don't listen to him, his time has passed.

You need to repeal the 2nd amendment to do all those things, otherwise it will be tied up in court with almost all of the laws teeth eventually knocked out by the SC. 

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

I am not spinning it, the fact is that your language strongly implies that there is some shame in having a mental illness. It is that type of attitude which keeps people from getting treatment. Would you say that someone who has cancer "deserves" radiation or chemo? No, of course not, so when you use that language when talking about mental illness you should be aware of what you are doing and how close it is to the coded language that Trump and others use to make dark skinned immigrants out to be a lesser class of people.  

Really?  You think you're not spinning this to redirect the problem away from the gun nuts?  Have you ever heard of an intervention?  People who want to help the person in need tell them they need help. 

These people who value their guns more than human life need help!  Dancing around this only works to perpetuate the problem.

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

My son was attending NIU when they had their turn.  As soon as I heard about it, I called him.  It went to voicemail.  It was over an hour before I heard from him.  He was okay.  But for that hour+, I wasn't.

I've been to the wakes of far too many children.  One was my best friend.  My son lost two of his best friends.  My daughter, her boyfriend.  None were from gun deaths but all were filled with a sadness and grief that can't be described.  You can't console the parents.  You can't explain it to the siblings.  You just have to be there when they need you.

If anyone lacks the empathy to understand this grief, then, as Cal said, just shut the fuck up!  These gun nuts are nuts because all they can think about is their precious guns.  If that's the case, KEEP IT TO YOURSELF!  Let the families mourn their loss, even if it means touring the country trying to find some way to fill the hole left in their hearts.

Your lack of self awareness is mind boggling. When I point out that you are saying things hurtful to the mentally ill and those who lost children to mental illness, you accuse me of spinning things. Look in a mirror man. I don't need to imagine jack shit, it has not even been twelve months since I buried my daughter. Seriously, get a clue and until then take your own advice and shut the fuck up. 

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

You need to repeal the 2nd amendment to do all those things, otherwise it will be tied up in court with almost all of the laws teeth eventually knocked out by the SC. 

That will not happen at least in our lifetime. What will happen is assault type weapons the ARs and AK that shoot .223 and above with ability to carry large capacities will be restricted similarly to full auto weapons. You can own and shoot them but you can't just drop into your local shop and armor up. It may take more tragic events but people are getting fed up - I certainly am. I had planned on buying an AR or similar when the fun wore off and the rednecks starting unloading them (pun intended) but no more. If I had one I would cut it up. I have a small collection with the only one not being for hunting is a 1911 that my dad brought back from the WWII.

Also, fucking ammo - been reading about the nutters frenzy over the Russian hollow points. You don't need a hollow point for self defense in an AK47.  I have no idea how to deal with the mental issues and my brother shot himself but I do see a path to restricting weapons of mass destruction. I do know your pain and sacrifice Len and just want to point out that in the push for freedom we make drugs and guns easy and affordable and mental health almost unavailable.

Sign me

Fed Up.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, d'ranger said:

That will not happen at least in our lifetime. What will happen is assault type weapons the ARs and AK that shoot .223 and above with ability to carry large capacities will be restricted similarly to full auto weapons. You can own and shoot them but you can't just drop into your local shop and armor up. It may take more tragic events but people are getting fed up - I certainly am. I had planned on buying an AR or similar when the fun wore off and the rednecks starting unloading them (pun intended) but no more. If I had one I would cut it up. I have a small collection with the only one not being for hunting is a 1911 that my dad brought back from the WWII.

Also, fucking ammo - been reading about the nutters frenzy over the Russian hollow points. You don't need a hollow point for self defense in an AK47.  I have no idea how to deal with the mental issues and my brother shot himself but I do see a path to restricting weapons of mass destruction. I do know your pain and sacrifice Len and just want to point out that in the push for freedom we make drugs and guns easy and affordable and mental health almost unavailable.

Sign me

Fed Up.

I can see some restrictions on AR and AKs not being overturned by the SC, but just trying to inject some reality into the discussion. As long as the 2nd is in place, most of the proposals being tossed around will be overturned eventually. I still have some guns which I could not unload before the bottom fell out, and a couple I will probably keep as long as they guns are still legal, but would be completely fine with a repeal of the 2nd.

I am not aware of the Russian hollow point drama. I think in general, we are ceding the rational center to the irrational extremists. Most gun owners support some types of new gun control. Most folks who don't own guns, support some notion of private ownership. Those "most folks" however are largely absent in discussions, in no small part because they are shouted down by the extremists on both sides. 

Agree completely with our misplaced priorities as a society. Our treatment of mental illness is pitiful. When we are not making it inaccessible or unaffordable, we are making it shameful. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, d'ranger said:
47 minutes ago, LenP said:

You need to repeal the 2nd amendment to do all those things, otherwise it will be tied up in court with almost all of the laws teeth eventually knocked out by the SC. 

That will not happen at least in our lifetime. What will happen is assault type weapons the ARs and AK that shoot .223 and above with ability to carry large capacities will be restricted similarly to full auto weapons. You can own and shoot them but you can't just drop into your local shop and armor up. It may take more tragic events but people are getting fed up - I certainly am.     ...     ...

I think it's possible to repeal the 2nd. As has been pointed out, that's the only way to not have the Supreme Court fuck it up.

A huge number of USAneans are fed up. All it would take is good leadership of the campaign. Somebody could step up tomorrow.

- DSK

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

I think it's possible to repeal the 2nd. As has been pointed out, that's the only way to not have the Supreme Court fuck it up.

A huge number of USAneans are fed up. All it would take is good leadership of the campaign. Somebody could step up tomorrow.

- DSK

Not possible - 13 states. Red States - the people who distrust and hate the Left while sinking in the morass of drugs and job losses. The middle of the country seems hell bent on taking the rest down with it. Easier? Impeach a couple SC judges and appoint those who have some semblance of honor and integrity. You know, those who care more about the living than denying womens rights.

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

You need to repeal the 2nd amendment to do all those things, otherwise it will be tied up in court with almost all of the laws teeth eventually knocked out by the SC. 

You may be right, but I am not a fan of a winner takes all strategy. Even the doddering fuddy duddy's on the Supreme Court know which way the wind blows and which way the right decision lays.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:
20 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

I've said for years that "responsible gun owners" need to get out in front of this, or will end up losing.

I'm not completely disagreeing with you on this.  What does "get out in front of this" mean?  What does that look like to you and your elk?

Not sure I have an elk, but you'll probably give me one..... or would that be (cue music) SOCIALISM !!!

By "getting out in front" I mean leading some meaningful action on keeping guns away from sociopaths. Most gun nuts know more about the current state of gun regulations than gun grabbers. Explain what ALREADY IS being done, and how it could be done better. Perhaps even advocate for updates, more realistic funding, etc etc, of current enforcement before adding new ones.

You know, act like adults instead of spoiled, spiteful, stupid children.

- DSK

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

I'm not completely disagreeing with you on this.  What does "get out in front of this" mean?  What does that look like to you and your elk?

I’d like to say that guns should be restricted to 1791 technology, but that’s not happening any time soon. 

That said, I do feel strongly that magazine size and maybe rate of fire need to be regulated. Ban “assault weapons”? What exactly is an assault weapon?

Wiki -

Assault weapon is a term used in the United States to define some types of firearms.[1] The definition varies among regulating jurisdictions, but usually includes semi-automatic rifles with a detachable magazine and a pistol grip, and sometimes other features such as a vertical forward gripflash suppressor or barrel shroud.[1][2] Some firearms are specified by name.[3] At the time that the now-defunct Federal Assault Weapons Ban passed in 1994, the U.S. Department of Justice said, "In general, assault weapons are semiautomatic firearms with a large magazine of ammunition that were designed and configured for rapid fire and combat use."[3] The origin of the term has been attributed to legislators, gun control groups, the media and the firearms industry.[1][4][5][6][7] It is sometimes conflated with the term "assault rifle", which refers to selective-fire military rifles that can fire in automatic or burst mode.[5]

After the December 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting, many news organizations ran stories about assault weapons, explaining their varying definitions and presenting varying opinions about whether they should be banned again at the federal level.[1][5][8][9]

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

And yes, I get really really really fucking tired of people pretending they are reasonable and rational when they clearly aren't.

It's called concern trolling.

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

So I'll pose the question to you too.... what do you consider "reasonable gun laws"?  Please be specific.

How many would  have died last weekend if we lhad imited mags to 10rds (and since I had a nice ride on my Unicorn, had the large capacity mags out of circulation).  

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

"These people" being the ACLU, the vast majority of liberals and pretty much everyone else.  

How far would you be willing to go in limiting free speech and privacy rights to protect human life?  Probably not very far, me thinks......

Fuck off.

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

I'll be happy to support that as soon as you agree that we should restrict the "right to a free press" and the "right to privacy" to the technology of 1791 as well.  

Yeah, that first line was a throw away. How about the real point, the second line? 

 

1 hour ago, Sean said:

That said, I do feel strongly that magazine size and maybe rate of fire need to be regulated.

 

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

I have posted numerous times on exactly that.  I have written my congress critters to tell them to get some shit done, but mainly to enforce the laws already on the books.

Like they do with immigration laws?

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

So I'll pose the question to you too.... what do you consider "reasonable gun laws"?  Please be specific.

1. Universal background checks, including online, gun show and private sales.   

2. Restriction on magazine size. 

3. Ban on assault style weapons like the AR 15. 

4. CDC allowed to study gun violence. 

5. Increased education requirements for open/carry licenses. 

6.0Guns licensed and insured just like automobiles.  

And while some of these things may not have had an immediate effect on recent mass shootings, it moves the cultural needle.  We have a cultural issue in America...toxic masculinity, easy access to guns and currently, a President who advocates violence against brown people.  

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

I'll be happy to support that as soon as you agree that we should restrict the "right to a free press" and the "right to privacy" to the technology of 1791 as well.  

How would the free press be affected by 1791 technology?  And free speech is already quite regulated.  You can't yell fire in a crowded building.  And right to privacy?  Already fucked.  

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

What size Mag would you like to see?  1, 2, 5, 10?

As for rate of fire..... its one round per trigger pull.  There this nothing special about an AR-15's rate of fire.  Its how fast the shooter can pull the trigger.  All of these gunz have the exact same rate of fire:

ar.png

67764062_1_x.jpg?auto=webp&format=pjpg&v

703597_ts.jpg

 

029_edited-2.jpg_thumbnail0.jpg

 

48996asfkhk333.jpg

37933-DEFAULT-l.jpg

I’m not much of a gun head, but I’ve deer hunted a couple times. Used a 30 06, bolt action, 5+1 rounds if I recall correctly. I don’t think you need much more than that to hunt deer or shoot targets. 

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

Really?  Are you seriously asking that question?

But just in case you really are that naive and not being deliberatley obtuse:

  • TV
  • radio
  • Internet

The Free press would be limited to this:

f5cbcab508185e15709cf193ec5ced82.jpg

Everything else could be highly regulated by the gov't.  

WTF?!? wait a minute... FREE press, isn't that [scary music] SOCIALISM ?!?

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites

For all of Jeff's quite reasonable ideas, I think that enabling legislation is necessary. So I propose:

The second amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.

If you can't remember the second amendment, it says:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Unfortunately, that has been misconstrued by modern conservative courts as a personal right. But any which way you look at it, it's an anachronism in a modern civil society.

After the second amendment is repealed, we have a republican form of government. We also have states. My guess is that Idaho will be less restrictive and California will be more restrictive. I don't live in Idaho; so this is fine by me. Congress will probably pass laws as well. But this will end the idea that anyone can buy a gun without proper background checks, registration, licensing and insurance. Basically, guns would regulated on the level of cars.

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

Really?  Are you seriously asking that question?

But just in case you really are that naive and not being deliberatley obtuse:

  • TV
  • radio
  • Internet

The Free press would be limited to this:

f5cbcab508185e15709cf193ec5ced82.jpg

Everything else could be highly regulated by the gov't.  

Free press has nothing to do with the media type.  Never has been.  Right to bear arms has always been about what "arms" are.  It begs the question of why you think "arms" only has to do with personal fire arms.  If I am to have a well regulated militia I would want laser guided nukes.  Is that where we should be?  That is a serious question.  I would like to know why an AR-15 is ok to own but a not a nuclear arm.

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

Free press has nothing to do with the media type.  Never has been.  Right to bear arms has always been about what "arms" are.  It begs the question of why you think "arms" only has to do with personal fire arms.  If I am to have a well regulated militia I would want laser guided nukes.  Is that where we should be?  That is a serious question.  I would like to know why an AR-15 is ok to own but a not a nuclear arm.

I would just like to point out that you DO NOT want laser guided nukes.  

Link to post
Share on other sites