Jump to content

260 Mass Shootings 160 Days, When Will it be Too Much?


Recommended Posts

Just now, Cal20sailor said:

We may inch closer, but we have many miles to go before civil war.  You seem very comfortable with hyperbole

Maybe. My opinion about civil war may be more pressing than yours.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 297
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Not offended at all. Not by anything you have said. Offended by the state of America.

But you'll never give up your personal armory without being forced to. So your just another member in the club.

It's kinda depressing when you realize there are quite a few folks who've simply decided we had it too good, and now need to tear it all down. I suppose a Great Depression and war every 3 generations

Posted Images

1 hour ago, badlatitude said:

The intent of the post was a search for solutions to gun violence.

Yeah, your "born yesterday babe in the woods" act is not at all convincing.

You know very well the policy SOLution to mass shootings, around the country, around the world, and in the US Congress is to DO SOMETHING to ban battlefield .22's and other such weapons of mass destruction.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Excoded Tom said:

Yeah, your "born yesterday babe in the woods" act is not at all convincing.

You know very well the policy SOLution to mass shootings, around the country, around the world, and in the US Congress is to DO SOMETHING to ban battlefield .22's and other such weapons of mass destruction.

 

Actually no. That horse has left the barn. I want the folks who supply the weapons to be liable, yes, even you owners who don't secure your precious. Also, I think an ammo tax to offset the societal costs is more than fair.  Don't want to pay it? I suppose you can load your own. Not sure how many nutters are loading their own these days, that's more a hobbyist or terrorist thing.

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

Yeah, your "born yesterday babe in the woods" act is not at all convincing.

You know very well the policy SOLution to mass shootings, around the country, around the world, and in the US Congress is to DO SOMETHING to ban battlefield .22's and other such weapons of mass destruction.

 

Being a crybaby about your dogballs is not convincing either. There are SOLutions, ending the Drug War, end anti-psychotics and anti-depressive meds, proactive mental health, economic solutions, and a way to conform and create workable gun laws. It's a long list, being a crybaby about it isn't helpful.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Burning Man said:
2 hours ago, Mike G said:

You "self-dinged".  I like that.

If you're feeling frisky sometime, self "ding-fucking-ding" and see how that feels.

You can’t ding yourself.  That’s not allowed.

Yes you can, but it will make you go blind

- DSK

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Raz'r said:

Actually no. That horse has left the barn. I want the folks who supply the weapons to be liable, yes, even you owners who don't secure your precious.

FWIW there are pretty heavy penalties here for not properly securing firearms and ammo. The cops do check, too.

As for Tom's whining, he's correct and boring at the same time. Correct insofar as no bling added to a 22LR is going to make it anything other than a 22LR but so what, it's just bling, unbolt it, problem solved, stop whining. He just uses it as a distraction anyway. What the lawmakers should do if they actually want to achieve anything of substance is concentrate on lethality & rate of fire/speed of reloading not bling bolted to rabbit guns. I don't know if it's just a desire for publicity without actually changing anything or utter ignorance that they even bother with the 'assault rifle' thing. A lot of that is cosmetic; what counts is bullet mass, velocity and rate of fire.

I don't think anything actually *can* be done in the USA now, you're too far down the road and there isn't any consensus that there is a problem let alone a solvable one. The anti-gun contingent lie & abuse statistics to try to demonise all firearms owners thereby inviting contempt and suspicion and the serious gun nuts won't give an inch anyway.

Bored now.

FKT

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

FWIW there are pretty heavy penalties here for not properly securing firearms and ammo. The cops do check, too.

As for Tom's whining, he's correct and boring at the same time. Correct insofar as no bling added to a 22LR is going to make it anything other than a 22LR but so what, it's just bling, unbolt it, problem solved, stop whining. He just uses it as a distraction anyway. What the lawmakers should do if they actually want to achieve anything of substance is concentrate on lethality & rate of fire/speed of reloading not bling bolted to rabbit guns. I don't know if it's just a desire for publicity without actually changing anything or utter ignorance that they even bother with the 'assault rifle' thing. A lot of that is cosmetic; what counts is bullet mass, velocity and rate of fire.

I don't think anything actually *can* be done in the USA now, you're too far down the road and there isn't any consensus that there is a problem let alone a solvable one. The anti-gun contingent lie & abuse statistics to try to demonise all firearms owners thereby inviting contempt and suspicion and the serious gun nuts won't give an inch anyway.

Bored now.

FKT

And another gun thread crawls away to die in the corner.

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

And another gun thread crawls away to die in the corner.

Yeah. Boring. Predictable outcome - more verbiage, nothing else.

Meanwhile the price of CNC gear drops, the accuracy increases, ditto 3D printers. G-code files get uploaded to Web sites. In the USA it's not illegal to make a firearm for your own use. Getting easier to do all the time.

Ammo is a bit more difficult to do en masse. Concentrate on ammo restrictions.

Needs a *major* cultural shift in US thinking.

Absent that then the trajectory will continue.

Ending the useless drug war might help provided the gang-bangers don't just find some other illegal activity to kill each other & passers-by over. Still worth doing as I've said.

Restricting centrefire semiauto firearms with removable mags would help cut down on stranger mass murders. Maybe - there's so many in circulation it's probably too late.

Compulsory purchase would help remove them but the anti-gun people wouldn't have a bar of that. They want the guns but don't want to pay and attempt to use bogus arguments as to why they shouldn't. That's half smart & shows the priority of financially punishing owners is higher than actually removing guns from circulation. Since this is bleeding obvious it's also counterproductive and nothing happens.

And so it goes.

Not my country. Happy with that at least.

FKT

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

Yeah. Boring. Predictable outcome - more verbiage, nothing else.

Meanwhile the price of CNC gear drops, the accuracy increases, ditto 3D printers. G-code files get uploaded to Web sites. In the USA it's not illegal to make a firearm for your own use. Getting easier to do all the time.

Ammo is a bit more difficult to do en masse. Concentrate on ammo restrictions.

Needs a *major* cultural shift in US thinking.

Absent that then the trajectory will continue.

Ending the useless drug war might help provided the gang-bangers don't just find some other illegal activity to kill each other & passers-by over. Still worth doing as I've said.

Restricting centrefire semiauto firearms with removable mags would help cut down on stranger mass murders. Maybe - there's so many in circulation it's probably too late.

Compulsory purchase would help remove them but the anti-gun people wouldn't have a bar of that. They want the guns but don't want to pay and attempt to use bogus arguments as to why they shouldn't. That's half smart & shows the priority of financially punishing owners is higher than actually removing guns from circulation. Since this is bleeding obvious it's also counterproductive and nothing happens.

And so it goes.

Not my country. Happy with that at least.

FKT

So we become subjects like you, for a false sense of security?

None of what you propose is possible in the USA.

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

Okay. You are correct and it would be folly for me to continue that argument. Still, we inch closer and closer to civil war, and I can't help but wonder how that changes normal people into killers.

How is the USA inching closer to civil war..?

Whose leading the charge from each side?

Enquiring minds want to know.

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

How is the USA inching closer to civil war..?

Whose leading the charge from each side?

Enquiring minds want to know.

We are not even close. 

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

How is the USA inching closer to civil war..?

Whose leading the charge from each side?

Enquiring minds want to know.

It's an arguable point. Many people in the U.S. are unhappy with the economy, and the disappearance of good jobs, the lack of affordable housing. Especially after the hit economically in 2008, it makes sustaining any lifestyle out of reach for many people.

Donald Trump did not help the case with his bluster and bullying ways, people were ready to listen to an authoritarian challenge to the status quo.

This may help you understand the dynamics at play.https://www.abc.net.au/triplej/programs/hack/model-predicting-united-states-disorder-now-points-to-civil-war/12365280

If Biden is able to soothe peoples anger and build an economy for everyone, then things could change. If he cannot then problems could get worse.

 

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

I would like to address actual facts, not your fantasy of numbers.

Wash the sand out of your vagina, bra.  You're being a big fucking pussy and trying to run away from your own request when you didn't like the facts. 

The fact is The numbers of gun owners are done by polls and surveys just like many many others things that we collect stats on.  I'm sure you put a lot of stock in other gallup polling for other things as long as it agrees with your agenda.

Here is the historical average for gun owning households.  https://news.gallup.com/poll/1645/guns.aspx

image.png.42ee5c0a54fbc91635029c8c2a5f162e.png

Since 1980s, the numbers have remained relatively steady around the mid-40% range.  There is no reason to think that number has gone down significantly.  Even the cite I gave you said the current household number is still in the 40-ish % range with about 20 Million individuals owning a gun.  With the recent spike in new gun ownership since the obama era and especially during covid.... again those numbers are likely LOW.

Why are you being such a pussy on this???  Seriously, you asked for a cite and I gave it to you.  Reputable sources that are commonly accepted.  Do you think that your behavior here on this, when you're the one who demanded a cite, isn't making you look like a total douche???  You're acting like a child who just got shown up and now you're going to stomp away crying.  Grow a sack and man up to the fact that the numbers of gun owners relative to the numbers who are committing murder with them is FUCKING TINY!!!

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

I would submit that firing at "an assailant" fifty yards away might not be considered self-defense.

Oh Fucking Fucks sake!  Are you a total retard or just playing one on TV?  The point just whizzed by you like a near miss from a bullet aimed at your head.  A miss is a miss.

That she could hit something at 50 yds (not a super easy task in any circumstances) with the AR having never touched one before probably means that someone down a hallway would pretty much be toast.  No so much with a pistol.

I know you're being deliberately obtuse, but for FFS, it gets so fucking tedious when people just deliberately miss the point when it's biting them in the balls.

image.png.b6da19469a897c49a92e20a3d8eda569.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, badlatitude said:
22 hours ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

Yeah but you'd be really hard put to argue that they were out by one or even 2 orders of magnitude.

Which still leaves the discussion at essentially the same point - the overwhelming majority of gun owners DO NOT kill others with their firearms.

Give it up - there's absolutely no logical way you can argue against this proposition. To do so requires you to argue that a) firearms killings are *vastly* under-reported or b) ownership of firearms is vastly exaggerated. Or both.

Go for it. Should be entertaining.

You won't, of course, because on this topic you're incapable of shifting from your POV.

FKT

Expand  

Okay. You are correct and it would be folly for me to continue that argument. Still, we inch closer and closer to civil war, and I can't help but wonder how that changes normal people into killers.

I see.... so you stipulated MY point to FKT. But you can't be man enough to admit it to me when YOU asked ME for the cite.

And then you move the goal posts and talk about Civil War.  WTF has that got to do with now or the point that @Happy was trying to make.  Start a new thread on your fears of a civil war if its so important to you.  I would find that to be a fascinating discussion.

image.png.0646adf3fb1e8ae31ee2da11e56cc499.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Burning Man said:

Grow a sack and man up to the fact that the numbers of gun owners relative to the numbers who are committing murder with them is FUCKING TINY!!!

AFTER THE DE-FLUFFING

Houston, we have a problem.

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

Since 1980s, the numbers have remained relatively steady around the mid-40% range. 

Bullshit. More like mid-thirties, in a clear pattern of decline..

The gold standard for the quantification of gun ownership is, of course, the GSS, because they have asked the same question, in the same way, in their annual surveys, since the 70s. And I have told you the score, straight up, on Political Anarchy. You knew better not long ago, Fluffy Jeff.

image.gif.0786ee25dd3ca2e285954c26a173703a.gif

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Burning Man said:

I see.... so you stipulated MY point to FKT. But you can't be man enough to admit it to me when YOU asked ME for the cite.

And then you move the goal posts and talk about Civil War.  WTF has that got to do with now or the point that @Happy was trying to make.  Start a new thread on your fears of a civil war if its so important to you.  I would find that to be a fascinating discussion.

image.png.0646adf3fb1e8ae31ee2da11e56cc499.png

Bozo, you are the worst person on the planet when it comes to thread drift. The topic is solutions, and I would swear you are doing this on purpose.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

The anti-gun contingent lie & abuse statistics to try to demonise all firearms owners thereby inviting contempt and suspicion

How about a few examples? Is "260 mass shootings in 160 days" a stat worth considering?

Look, the stats are so bad, they need no manipulation. The stats are so bad the gun lobby didn't want the information gathered, for 25 years.

In short, the statistics indicate

  • the new right-to-carry states show significant increases in crime.
  • areas with weak gun laws have more gun-related problems. 
  • AW's have become quite a problem since the good old days of the AW ban.
  • Broad handgun issues need to be faced.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cashier slaughtered in supermarket for telling man to wear a mask

 

https://nypost.com/2021/06/14/woman-killed-in-supermarket-for-telling-man-to-wear-a-mask/

That's some special gun culture ya all have down there, it just continues to endlessly kill regular folks.

Again, that's fucked up.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jocal505 said:
3 hours ago, Burning Man said:

Grow a sack and man up to the fact that the numbers of gun owners relative to the numbers who are committing murder with them is FUCKING TINY!!!

AFTER THE DE-FLUFFING

Houston, we have a problem.

Oh c'mon Jocal - 10,000+ gun homicides per year is a FUCKING TINY problem.

1,500,000 gun homicides since I was in high school is a FUCKING TINY problem.

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

Oh c'mon Jocal - 10,000+ gun homicides per year is a FUCKING TINY problem.

1,500,000 gun homicides since I was in high school is a FUCKING TINY problem.

For a certain type of insecure males, the idea of not having their beloved guns is a FUCKING HUGE problem. They don't give a flying fuck how many die, as long as they can have that inner image of themselves as macho fearless cowboys/soldiers/secret agents.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

As for Tom's whining, he's correct and boring at the same time. Correct insofar as no bling added to a 22LR is going to make it anything other than a 22LR but so what, it's just bling, unbolt it, problem solved, stop whining. He just uses it as a distraction anyway.

"Just comply" is one answer to another stupid prohibition program. Just don't enact the stupid prohibition program is another. I'm in the latter camp.

How is it that my mentioning examples of "assault" weapons is a distraction, but when others give different examples, that's just fine? I think any example is an example and, just like in Australia and Canada, battlefield .22's are assault weapons here. What's so wrong about coming out and saying so?

A big difference is that battlefield .22's are part of the ordinary military equipment and thus protected by the second amendment under US v Miller.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Raz'r said:

I want the folks who supply the weapons to be liable, yes, even you owners who don't secure your precious.

I support safe storage laws as well. Where we might differ is the question of liability for those of us who lock up guns. Grabbers in my state have tried to remove that liability protection and grabbers here have said dumb stuff like this:

On 9/18/2020 at 12:32 PM, Olsonist said:

It also absolves individuals of the LIABILITY FOR USE by others. So if your roommate steals your keys and bypasses your 'secure gun storage' and uses your gun to holdup a liquor store, you're totally good. But if your roommate steals your keys and runs over a little old lady with your car, well that's what you have liability insurance for.

I think we should treat liability for stolen property the same way for guns and cars, which is not how Olsonist thinks we treat cars, nor apparently how he thinks we should treat guns.

What do you think? If I lock up my guns and a criminal defeats the safe, should I be liable?

13 hours ago, Raz'r said:

Also, I think an ammo tax to offset the societal costs is more than fair.

This is another way of saying what Olsonist was saying: peaceful people are liable for the actions of criminals. It's also kinda like a poll tax applied to voting rights, and will disproportionately affect poor people, disproportionately minorities. That's sometimes bad, but I understand that no gun control can be bad.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/13/2021 at 9:26 PM, badlatitude said:

It is also impossible to gauge gun violence when robberies, gun related violence, and gang violence are not tracked universally, because the number one gun lobby spends $55 million a year making sure government doesn't go there.

The lack of a source is noted. Open Secrets says it's less.

But even if you were right, my reaction is, "what a cute little corporation they have there!" When it comes to lobbying, Bloomberg is about twice as evil.
 

Quote

 

"Let's just go on the record, they talk about 40 Democrats," Bloomberg said, referring to former Vice President Joe Biden, his rival who previously boasted of his work helping secure victories for House Democrats in the midterms.

"Twenty-one of those were people that I spent $100 million to help elect," he continued. "All of the new Democrats that came in and put Nancy Pelosi in charge and gave the Congress the ability to control this president, I bough — I got them."

 

I agree with him. Let's go on record. Is $pending 100 million to bu... uh... get congresscritters wrong?

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Burning Man said:

 

Obtuse? Pot, meet kettle. I know you get your jollies lobbing insults. It’s your style, if you have such a thing. Clearly you’re quite emotionally invested in your AR-15 penis substitute. But for home defense, which is what you’ve suggested, it’s not the best choice. It's not even a good choice. The alternative for home defense isn’t a handgun, it’s a shotgun. Not as sexy as an AR, but a damn sight easier to use and much faster to get a round off in a hurry with a high probability of hitting your target. That is, if you’re not simply a poser trying to play Rambo or defend your home against a hoard of armed assailants at 50 yards.

In the interest of full disclosure, I have a CWP, a few firearms, and have had an AR-15 (which I no longer have because it really isn’t a practical choice for home defense and they’re not legal for hunting–although they are a lot of fun on the range). I’m not anti-gun by any means, just pro firearm safety and anti-mass shooting. I also don’t think the AR should be outlawed, just required to be stored and used at a range.

I also reject off hand the bullshit about a ‘citizen militia’ being any group of yahoos with guns and a political ideology whose intent is to overthrow a government with whom they disagree. That’s neither well regulated nor in the interest of a free State. It’s anarchy.

One of the biggest problems with the so-called Assault Rifles is that they’ve been romanticized in movies, and the controversy surrounding them creates a “forbidden fruit” attraction. One solution to that is to embrace the existence of firearms, make mandatory firearm safety classes in K-12, and reduce the mystique by introducing facts and hands-on experience. The approach of “just say no to firearms” is no more effective than Nancy’s “say no to drugs” campaign. IMO, it’s time to change tacks.

Of course, that’d go over like a turd in a punch bowl

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Danceswithoctopus said:

I also don’t think the AR should be outlawed, just required to be stored and used at a range.

Almost forgot what one of those is. I haven't been to a range in at least 20 years. We just shoot the battlefield .22 in our back yard and if I had a different kind of assault weapon, we'd shoot it in the back yard too. What problem do you think will be solved by trying to make me do that at a range instead?

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

Access.

I don't think my access to a battlefield .22 has had any bad consequences for anyone. What makes you think it has?

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

Bozo, you are the worst person on the planet when it comes to thread drift. The topic is solutions, and I would swear you are doing this on purpose.

I'm doing it on purpose because YOU asked ME for a cite!  And when I gave it to you and it destroyed your narrative, you are now pretending it never happened even though you knew damn well before you even asked that the vast vast majority of gun owners out there, presumably like yourself, are not at any risk of killing anyone with it.  

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

Is "260 mass shootings in 160 days" a stat worth considering?

No, they are not worth considering because the GVA does nothing but pad their number of mass shootings with gang and drug related violence in a shitty attempt to paint a law abiding gun owner who has never done anything wrong with a car full of gangbangers shooting up and killing their rivals during a drive-by.

Talk about "fluff".  Sheesh!

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

One of the biggest problems with the so-called Assault Rifles is that they’ve been romanticized in movies, and the controversy surrounding them creates a “forbidden fruit” attraction. One solution to that is to embrace the existence of firearms, make mandatory firearm safety classes in K-12, and reduce the mystique by introducing facts and hands-on experience. The approach of “just say no to firearms” is no more effective than Nancy’s “say no to drugs” campaign. IMO, it’s time to change tacks.

Of course, that’d go over like a turd in a punch bowl

It would only go over like a turd with the gun grabber lobby - because 1) it would mean treating people like adults and holding individuals responsible for their actions rather than collective punishment and 2) it would begin to get at the root causes of the problems that cause someone to pick up a gun and kill others.  Most gun owners I know would embrace something like what you describe.  The grabbers would lose their literal shit.   

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to keep the turd in the collective punch bowl, you may have missed the part where I suggest that the AR be kept and used at a secure armory or range. (Of course, then one gets to argue over the definition of an AR, which I will avoid pending serious consideration of the rest of the proposition. My proposition would actually include hunting rifles, which could be checked out during respective seasons to licensed hunters.)

Some with the requisite experience might recognize that this is similar to the protocol used by the military (you don't think you're issued a firearm and just get to keep it in your footlocker, do you?).

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

I'm doing it on purpose because YOU asked ME for a cite!  And when I gave it to you and it destroyed your narrative, you are now pretending it never happened even though you knew damn well before you even asked that the vast vast majority of gun owners out there, presumably like yourself, are not at any risk of killing anyone with it.  

I didn't see a constructive response to a solution for gun violence in that screed. This isn't about YOU, it is about US.

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

Yes, let's make guns easier to get. What could go wrong, they said.

 

 

I missed where anyone here is suggesting making gunz easier to get? 

As to this incident.  I would like to see more context of what happened, because the vid doesn't show who or why she was pointing a gun at someone.  So I'm not immediately willing to pass judgement until those facts are out.  The rent a cops in the mall didn't seem overly concerned about her.  But it would have to be a pretty egregious circumstance such as her life was in immediate danger for that brandishment to be legal.  

If it is determined that she had no legal grounds for brandishing a firearm (which usually have very strict and narrow definitions of when it's legal) - I hope she is arrested and convicted to the fullest extent of the law.  That way we prevent this sort of behavior is to harshly punish those who break the laws and make public examples out of them.  

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

I didn't see a constructive response to a solution for gun violence in that screed. This isn't about YOU, it is about US.

Well, then don't make asinine requests for cites when you have zero interest in what is produced.  

Also, "constructive responses and discussions for solutions to gun violence" also involve not perpetuating myths and untruths and acknowledging that there are legitimate arguments on both sides.  Until we have a discussion based in actual facts and truths on this subject and not just naked attempts to appeal to emotion - then we will have a construction response to solutions for gun violence.

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

Well, then don't make asinine requests for cites when you have zero interest in what is produced.  

Also, "constructive responses and discussions for solutions to gun violence" also involve not perpetuating myths and untruths and acknowledging that there are legitimate arguments on both sides.  Until we have a discussion based in actual facts and truths on this subject and not just naked attempts to appeal to emotion - then we will have a construction response to solutions for gun violence.

We won't have a constructive response as long as you insist on having the loudest voice.

 

 

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

We won't have a constructive response as long as you insist on having the loudest voice.

My voice only gets louder when I'm confronting deliberate obtuseness, blatant ignorance, and outrights lies.  Stop doing any or all of those constantly and I'll be quiet as a churchmouse.   

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

My voice only gets louder when I'm confronting deliberate obtuseness, blatant ignorance, and outrights lies.  Stop doing any or all of those constantly and I'll be quiet as a churchmouse.   

Your voice is like a fart in church. It becomes the only sound people hear.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Burning Man said:
4 minutes ago, badlatitude said:

We won't have a constructive response as long as you insist on having the loudest voice.

My voice only gets louder when I'm confronting deliberate obtuseness, blatant ignorance, and outrights lies.  Stop doing any or all of those constantly and I'll be quiet as a churchmouse.   

To add, we also will have better constructive discussions when all parties commit to sticking to facts and not changing subjects when those facts don't support their case. 

You are the master at moving the goalposts here because you just skip over the parts you don't like or don't want to have to actually address and pretend they just didn't happen.  You might get away with that with some folks here, but that is not acceptable behavior in polite circles - unless your true goal is NOT constructive discussion and solution seeking but instead just spewing the usual dogma.  We have plenty of dogma here, we don't any need more.  What we have a dire shortage of here (and in the greater US) are people who are truly seeking solutions and are open to all POVs. 

Just saying.   

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, badlatitude said:
6 minutes ago, Burning Man said:

My voice only gets louder when I'm confronting deliberate obtuseness, blatant ignorance, and outrights lies.  Stop doing any or all of those constantly and I'll be quiet as a churchmouse.   

Your voice is like a fart in church. It becomes the only sound people hear.

Exhibit A for the prosecution, yer honor^^.  Well, that was truly "constructive".  Come back when you want to actually discuss solutions instead of nonsense.  You might start with offering some of your own solutions.  Not just your usual pablum.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, badlatitude said:
5 minutes ago, badlatitude said:

Your voice is like a fart in church. It becomes the only sound people hear.

You've chosen to ignore content by Burning Man. Options 

Excellent. :lol:  It's pretty obvious when someone loses the argument or runs out of actual constructive things to say when they go:

LALALALALALALALALALALALALLAL

 

image.thumb.png.1a1c9f4780ec8ca766fc02fa547065a9.png

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

No, they are not worth considering because the GVA does nothing but pad their number of mass shootings with gang and drug related violence in a shitty attempt to paint a law abiding gun owner who has never done anything wrong with a car full of gangbangers shooting up and killing their rivals during a drive-by.

Talk about "fluff".  Sheesh!

Twenty different journalists hop out of bed, and each combs over about 65 media sources, depending, to chronicle whatever gun violence incidents. In this way, the GVA monitors gun violence via somewhere between 1200 and 2000 media sources, daily. Their work is quotable, and citable, on any given day. Their reputation for journalistic integrity is rock-solid, AFAIK. Trash them if you can, just cite away.

They relate (they pass on, that is) the details of the various media reports on gun violence, then they add up (and present) the details.. They pay no attention to, or favor for or against, alleged gansta shootings. They are currently the best resource in the USA for the details of the daily gun carnage.

  • The GVA has changed the scorecard on AW shootings, by including the injured in their counts of mass shootings,
  • because when pork rounds are shot with a .223, the whole backside of the pork rounds vaporize .

If the GVA are jaded, spinning,  or exaggerating, the whole world you and your type can demonstrate that by comparing the facts of the cited reports with how the matter is presented by the GVA. Again. Proceed, if you have sketchy examples, but spare us the fluff.

If you have a better source on the daily gun carnage of the USA, speak up Jeffie, and we'll use it on Political Anarchy.

 

jeffie you need to up your game

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Burning Man said:

Excellent. :lol:  It's pretty obvious when someone loses the argument or runs out of actual constructive things to say when they go:

LALALALALALALALALALALALALLAL

 

image.thumb.png.1a1c9f4780ec8ca766fc02fa547065a9.png

You lost badlat, a fine and temperate fellow. You are not worth his time; I can relate. I love the way you never grow.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, jocal505 said:

You lost badlat, a fine and temperate fellow. You are not worth his time; I can relate. I love the way you never grow.

I give up. Whenever someone tries to start a thread about gun violence/control, it immediately goes to hell with every topic but the subject at hand. I'll stay away from gun threads from now on, there's no future in them.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

If I was rich enough and cold enough I'd be investing in US ammunition manufacturing shares.

The argument never ends, it devolves into arguing about how others argue, and nothing really changes. The gun culture started with generations raised on movies where the hero shoots the shit out of the bad guys, gets the chick, or rides off into the sunset. From John Wayne to Bond to Clint to Rambo and on and on......

Fortunately in Australia it only took one major massacre for us to accept very strict gun controls, which meant many gun owners had to hand in their weapons. One of the reasons was that we didn't have that gun-totin' cowboy fantasy ingrained in our collective unconscious. 

Guns were for farmers, payroll deliveries, professional hunters/control culls, cops, senior crims, and the military. Nobody wanted every idiot in their town to be allowed to own multiple semi-automatic weapons. It's common sense, isn't it?

We were just lucky as part of the birth of our nation not to have some slave-owning wig-wearing rich Constitution-writing white dudes without an effective standing army decide to write as a second amendment some words about everybody having to have a musket handy just in case the damn Brits come sailing over the horizon to reclaim their colonies.

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, badlatitude said:

I give up. Whenever someone tries to start a thread about gun violence/control, it immediately goes to hell with every topic but the subject at hand. I'll stay away from gun threads from now on, there's no future in them.

You race your boat... and you take the obstacles in stride.

You have a voice, and others need it. Please don't sit back and let a prolonged, stubborn campaign of gun disinformation spread around and win out.

Carry on, BL.

 

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

Just to keep the turd in the collective punch bowl, you may have missed the part where I suggest that the AR be kept and used at a secure armory or range. (Of course, then one gets to argue over the definition of an AR, which I will avoid pending serious consideration of the rest of the proposition. My proposition would actually include hunting rifles, which could be checked out during respective seasons to licensed hunters.)

Some with the requisite experience might recognize that this is similar to the protocol used by the military (you don't think you're issued a firearm and just get to keep it in your footlocker, do you?).

I don't see anything about handguns. Jeff and I seem to be the only ones to examine the "260 mass shootings" individually and discover that they're mostly bar fights late at night and gang drive-by's, both of which seem to predominantly involve pistols.

Your SOLution addresses a non-problem while ignoring the topic problem. The vast majority of people who have battlefield .22's or other assault weapons at home don't commit violent crimes with them, nor do hunters.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/14/2021 at 8:21 PM, Fah Kiew Tu said:

Restricting centrefire semiauto firearms with removable mags would help cut down on stranger mass murders. Maybe - there's so many in circulation it's probably too late.

Compulsory purchase would help remove them

Throwing in "centrefire" when you know that's now how the definitions are actually written in your country or ours is a distraction.

We don't do the compulsory purchase thing. Over here, "assault" weapons are simply defined as a public nuisance so that previously-legal property can be taken from the owners without compensation. That's how the laws are written right now in New Jersey and California and how the FL legislature proposes to treat battlefield .22's.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The PRO-SPEECH Act Is Anything but First Amendment-Friendly
 

Quote

 

It may be dubbed the "Promoting Rights and Online Speech Protections to Ensure Every Consumer is Heard" (PRO-SPEECH) Act, but a new bill from Mississippi Republican Sen. Roger Wicker is anything but First Amendment-friendly. Wicker's measure would ban huge swaths of online content moderation, forcing private internet forums to host speech that may currently violate their terms of service and be considered hateful, harassing, vulgar, or otherwise undesired.

The bill would also take aim at freedom of association and free markets, disallowing some tech services—such as app stores and cloud computing companies—from choosing what products they offer or what businesses they'll contract with.

Introduced Thursday, the so-called PRO-SPEECH Act strikes at the heart of First Amendment protections, compelling companies under threat of sanction from the government to platform messages they otherwise wouldn't.

Essentially, Wicker's bill is "net neutrality" legislation—something that was vehemently opposed by Republicans of yore—but for online content platforms, search engines, and marketplaces rather than internet service providers.

...

 

 

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

If I was rich enough and cold enough I'd be investing in US ammunition manufacturing shares.

The argument never ends, it devolves into arguing about how others argue, and nothing really changes. The gun culture started with generations raised on movies where the hero shoots the shit out of the bad guys, gets the chick, or rides off into the sunset. From John Wayne to Bond to Clint to Rambo and on and on......

Fortunately in Australia it only took one major massacre for us to accept very strict gun controls, which meant many gun owners had to hand in their weapons. One of the reasons was that we didn't have that gun-totin' cowboy fantasy ingrained in our collective unconscious. 

Guns were for farmers, payroll deliveries, professional hunters/control culls, cops, senior crims, and the military. Nobody wanted every idiot in their town to be allowed to own multiple semi-automatic weapons. It's common sense, isn't it?

We were just lucky as part of the birth of our nation not to have some slave-owning wig-wearing rich Constitution-writing white dudes without an effective standing army decide to write as a second amendment some words about everybody having to have a musket handy just in case the damn Brits come sailing over the horizon to reclaim their colonies.

 

 

^ that's beautiful, man ^

And if it's funny, that's because it's true.

- DSK

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

Guns were for farmers, payroll deliveries, professional hunters/control culls, cops, senior crims, and the military. Nobody wanted every idiot in their town to be allowed to own multiple semi-automatic weapons. It's common sense, isn't it?

How about museums?

On 5/5/2019 at 8:23 PM, Excoded Tom said:
On 5/5/2019 at 5:34 PM, Happy said:

Removing (and separately storing) the firing pin would work for most if not all old weapons. No big deal.

I am somewhat surprised that this wasn't a requirement years ago. Displaying working military hardware to the public would tempt the occasional fuckwit. As posted above, grenades and bombs are not displayed live.

I guess you didn't read the article. They DID remove firing pins. That wasn't enough for grabbers.

You seemed to think that removing the firing pins would be OK until I pointed out that the firing pins were already removed and still your grabbers went after museum collections.

If it were common sense, someone would have pointed out the problems that have been caused by these museum collections. No one has. Will you be the first?

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

If I was rich enough and cold enough I'd be investing in US ammunition manufacturing shares.

The argument never ends, it devolves into arguing about how others argue, and nothing really changes. The gun culture started with generations raised on movies where the hero shoots the shit out of the bad guys, gets the chick, or rides off into the sunset. From John Wayne to Bond to Clint to Rambo and on and on......

Fortunately in Australia it only took one major massacre for us to accept very strict gun controls, which meant many gun owners had to hand in their weapons. One of the reasons was that we didn't have that gun-totin' cowboy fantasy ingrained in our collective unconscious. 

Guns were for farmers, payroll deliveries, professional hunters/control culls, cops, senior crims, and the military. Nobody wanted every idiot in their town to be allowed to own multiple semi-automatic weapons. It's common sense, isn't it?

We were just lucky as part of the birth of our nation not to have some slave-owning wig-wearing rich Constitution-writing white dudes without an effective standing army decide to write as a second amendment some words about everybody having to have a musket handy just in case the damn Brits come sailing over the horizon to reclaim their colonies.

Try again.  When our country was founded there was a weapon in nearly every home.  Why don't you do a little research to figure out why.

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

Try again.  When our country was founded there was a weapon in nearly every home.  Why don't you do a little research to figure out why.

every home in America can have a musket...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Any nut can carry a gun and shoot someone, just ask the NRA

Ex-wife of Publix shooter 'disheartened' by Palm Beach County sheriff's comments (wptv.com)

 

ROYAL PALM BEACH, Fla. — The ex-wife of a Palm Beach County man who gunned down a 69-year-old grandmother and her 1-year-old grandson inside a Publix last week said she's "disheartened" by recent comments from Sheriff Ric Bradshaw, who believes the tragedy could've been prevented.

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

[Deleted for those who have Tom on ignore]

You're very good at picking apart proposed solutions, but not so good at suggesting any of your own. I've at least looked for a middle ground that actually addresses what I view as one of the major problems with firearms in this country. You disagree. I get that. And I disagree with you. So without a counter proposal, you've set us at an impasse. Yet Jeff and I seemed to find a little middle ground.

If you're not willing to work towards a solution, you're part of the problem, Tom. I would like to think that you don't want to be part of the problem. If that's true, what's your proposal?

As to handguns, actually all guns--everyone can have one provided they are willing to participate in a "well regulated militia". Of course, those should remain in the armory as with the regular military unless one could demonstrate an actual need (of course, this opens a Pandora's Box). But the training should include at least a couple of years of training in being "well regulated", ie: military service and a commitment to submit to military authority and participate in continuing training under that authority (including being subject to the UCMJ). And, yes, this does appear to change my initial proposal. If I had more time, and thought you were truly interested in considering the entire proposal, I might even lay it out. But there's no way I'm taking that time since you've demonstrated that your objective is simply to find flaws, not solutions.

So, rather than just argue with the suggestions of others, what's your proposal, Tom?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Danceswithoctopus said:

So, rather than just argue with the suggestions of others, what's your proposal, Tom?

To reduce "mass" shootings? Same as it was back on page 1 of this thread:

  

On 6/11/2021 at 6:03 AM, Excoded Tom said:

End the stupid drug war.

 

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

The argument never ends, it devolves into arguing about how others argue, and nothing really changes. The gun culture started with generations raised on movies where the hero shoots the shit out of the bad guys, gets the chick, or rides off into the sunset. From John Wayne to Bond to Clint to Rambo and on and on......

Juvenile Rambo fantasies are what drives the assault weapon mentality, pure and simple.

A writer attended the release of Rambo in Lebanon BITD - he said all the young Arab guys sprayed the sky with their AK47's after the show.

The gun nutz here and elsewhere defending their need of AR15's and other such deadly toys are exactly the same, if maybe slightly more restrained.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Danceswithoctopus said:
5 hours ago, Excoded Tom said:

[Deleted for those who have Tom on ignore]

You're a gentleman.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

You're a gentleman.

And a scholar.  Thank you.

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

Okay, Tom. How does ending the stupid drug war even remotely address some whackadoo going into a school/church/theatre/mall and opening fire at random people?

It probably won't, but I thought the thread topic was 260 mass shootings in 160 days? As I said, I'm one of very few who actually care enough to look into those individually and most of them seem to be gang drive-by's, after which no one wants to tell the police they saw anything. Drug war violence, not unlike alcohol prohibition violence.

My SOLution won't deal with the other large group of mass shootings: late night at a bar ones. Ending alcohol prohibition only ended some problems with alcohol, not all.

As for the politically convenient kind of shootings you're talking about, they're exceedingly rare and each one gets an individual thread here before the bodies reach room temperature. They also frequently involve deaths, while most of the mass shootings this thread is talking about do not involve any deaths.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Excoded Tom said:

most of them seem to be gang drive-by's

Is that you,  Bloomie?

11 minutes ago, Excoded Tom said:

the other large group of mass shootings: late night at a bar ones.

^^^ Research by Tom Ray. FACT: between 52% and 57% of mass murders relate to domestic violence.

 

12 minutes ago, Excoded Tom said:

,,,each one gets an individual thread here before the bodies reach room temperature.

Wrong. Neither of the two horrific major shootings from last week got a thread. 

 

14 minutes ago, Excoded Tom said:

most of the mass shootings this thread is talking about do not involve any deaths.

Hmmm. You are a civil rights whiz, named Tom Ray, and you give all gun injuries a hall pass? Pretty sketchy, that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, dacapo said:

Piteous Tom

or

Pitiable Tom

    Or

Pitiful Tom

    Or

Pathetic Tom.

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

 

while most of the mass shootings this thread is talking about do not involve any deaths.

That's because it is about mass shootings. Not mass murders. Is English not your first language?

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

That's because it is about mass shootings. Not mass murders. Is English not your first language?

  

On 6/10/2021 at 5:42 PM, basketcase said:

you are right, it wont go anywhere because i am not giving up the right to my guns. i deserve to own an ar15 more than you deserve to breathe.


People who don't breathe die. This is about mass shootings. Not mass murders. Is English not your first language? Perhaps that explains your unawareness of Canadian mass shootings.

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

FACT: between 52% and 57% of mass murders relate to domestic violence.

This thread is about mass shootings. Not mass murders. Is English not your first language?

  From the professional cherry pickers...

On 8/19/2019 at 9:01 PM, jocal505 said:

The study conducted by Bloomietown for Gun Grabbiness, a gun-grabby 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.

This thread is about mass shootings. Not mass murders. Is English not Bloomietown's first language?

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

This thread is about mass shootings. Not mass murders. Is English not your first language?

  From the professional cherry pickers...

This thread is about mass shootings. Not mass murders. Is English not Bloomietown's first language?

Have it your way.

The Many Ways Domestic Violence Foreshadows Mass Shootings

A new study released late last month further solidifies the connection between domestic violence and a propensity for future, public acts of violence. Researchers from the Educational Fund to Stop Gun Violence and Johns Hopkins analyzed 110 gun murders of four or more people between 2014 and 2019 and found that in 68 percent of incidents, the perpetrator either killed an intimate partner or a family member, or had a history of domestic violence. 

(...)

Some mass shootings began as attacks on romantic partners or family members that spilled over into the public realm; some transpired in private and involved only intimate partners and their children. The Gun Violence Archive reports that at least 190 mass shootings (defined as four or more people injured or killed) since 2013 have been domestic in nature. All of them demonstrate that gun violence is often a lot more intimate than the way mass shootings are portrayed in the media: as random, public attacks perpetrated by strangers. In reality, Americans are still most likely to be shot by someone they know. 

(...)

Scores of domestic shootings have progressed to public gun rampages, moving from intimate targets to unknown ones in a matter of hours. In 2019, a California man went on a 12-hour shooting spree across the San Fernando Valley, first killing his father and his brother and wounding his mother at their home in Canoga Park, then traveling to North Hollywood and gunning down an acquaintance and a passenger on a bus. The night before a California man embarked on a 2017 shooting spree through the rural community of Rancho Tehama Reserve that left four people dead and 11 others wounded, he fatally shot his wife and hid her body under the floor of their trailer. 

Even the first modern mass shooting began with domestic homicide: The perpetrator of the 1966 shooting at the University of Texas at Austin killed his wife and mother the night before his rampage.

Zeoli said it’s been difficult to explore the psychology of mass shooters who also kill family members because so many of them kill themselves as well. But she suspects that suicide is a driving factor. “We know that suicidality of a violent partner is one of the predictors of intimate partner homicide,” she said. “So it could be that whatever the impetus for suicide is, that’s driving this larger public mass shooting as well.”

https://www.thetrace.org/2021/06/mass-shooting-domestic-abuse-assault-data-san-jose/>

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

Neither of the two horrific major shootings from last week got a thread. 

There were 22 mass shootings from June 6 through June 12, so I'm not sure which two you mean.

Mass Shooting In Chicago

 

Quote

 

Six men and two women were wounded in a shooting early Sunday in Burnside on the South Side.

The group were standing in the sidewalk about 4 a.m. when two people inside a silver-colored car opened fire

 

Stupid drug war drive-by.

 

Mass Shooting In Utah
 

Quote

 

One man was shot to death and four other people were injured during a drive-by shooting in Salt Lake City early Sunday morning.

...

Police are asking those who may have any information to contact them at 801-799-3000 and reference case 21-96966.

 

Stupid drug war drive-by.

 

Mass Shooting in California
 

Quote

 

Five men were wounded in a drive-by shooting Sunday night in East Oakland, and one remained in critical condition Monday, police said.

...

For information leading to the arrest of a suspect, police are offering up to $25,000 in the shooting.

 

Stupid drug war drive-by.

 

Mass Shooting In Florida

Quote

He said a barrage of gunfire broke out when one or two cars pulled up into the strip mall and someone inside one of the vehicles opened fire on people leaving the hookah lounge.

Stupid drug war drive-by.

 

Mass Shooting In Ohio

Quote

Cleveland police say 8 people were shot in a drive-by shooting while attending a high school graduation party on Sunday.

Stupid drug war drive-by.

 

Mass Shooting in North Carolina

Quote

Four people suffered gunshot wounds when gunfire erupted at a large party in a trailer park in Maury, according to Greene County Sheriff Lemmie Smith.

At last, one that's not a stupid drug war drive by. Late night at a large party is a variation on the late night at a bar type of mass shooting.

 

Mass Shooting in Missouri

Quote

The shooting happened at North 7th and Chestnut Streets near Kiener Plaza at 3 a.m. Sunday.  Police said four teens, two 19-year-old men, a 18-year-old man and 17-year-old girl, were shot outside of Hooters after three armed suspects with assault rifles opened fire on them.

Another late night at a bar type mass shooting.

 

Those are just the ones from June 6th, but a pattern seems to be emerging: stupid drug war drive-by's and late night bar conflicts comprise all of those mass shootings. Only in the last case was the type of firearm even alleged, but we all know that the SOLution to mass shootings is to DO SOMETHING about battlefield .22's.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are at the intelligence level of the National Merit Scholarship, remember? What's with the anecdotes?

You are a Florida highbrow, remember? What's with the redneck gangsta smears, all over Political Anarchy?

Bro, show your gangsta gun violence stats. And show me the creds of those who compiled them. 

 

Did the gangstas do this?

Quote

The findings come against a backdrop of spiking gun sales and violence. The coronavirus pandemic and civil unrest spurred Americans to purchase a record-breaking 22 million guns in 2020. 

Violence increased, too. More than 19,000 Americans were killed by guns — excluding suicides — last year, a 26 percent increase over 2019, according to data compiled by the nonprofit Gun Violence Archive. The surge in violence has continued into the current year, with cities across the country reporting a stream of shootings that put them on track to break 2020 totals.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/17/us/arizona-shootings-victims/index.html

At least one person is dead and a dozen hurt after 8 shootings in West Valley area of metro Phoenix

 

Oh look, just another average day in gun loving America.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.fox5ny.com/news/city-of-san-jose-mandates-videotaping-of-all-gun-purchases

"The City Council unanimously approved the new law Tuesday, less than a month after a disgruntled employee fatally shot nine of his co-workers and then himself at a rail yard in San Jose, according to police.

 
 
 

The new ordinance is aimed at deterring an illegal practice known as straw purchasing, in which someone buys a gun for another person such as a felon or minor who is prohibited from owning firearms, the Mercury News reported.

Most retail stores in San Jose already have some sort of surveillance system. The new law requires them to take an extra step to capture audio and to retain the videos for at least 30 days, giving law enforcement the opportunity to collect evidence they might need to solve some gun crimes, said City Attorney Nora Frimann.

 

The new law is part of a 10-point gun control plan that Liccardo unveiled last week following the rail yard shooting by a disgruntled Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority employee who killed himself.

"We know a significant number of crooks and gangs get firearms through straw purchasing," Mayor Sam Liccardo said. "This set of ordinances is really focused on narrowing the flow of guns to those which are clearly legal and hopefully doing something to deter the flow of guns that are unlawful to own."

The mayor’s plan also calls for a separate ordinance that would require gun owners to carry liability insurance and pay a fee to cover taxpayer costs associated with firearm violence. The council is expected to consider that proposal this fall."

 

 

Liability insurance.. well that's the American way....

Link to post
Share on other sites