# Guns are still America’s religion



## SuperMatt

Biden is withdrawing the nomination for the head of the ATF (bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms) because he is an alcoholic…. Hahaha just kidding, it’s because he owns stock in tobacco companies….. anahahahahaahha just kidding, it’s because he supports gun control.

So, yeah… it was perfectly ok for fossil fuel lobbyists to run the EPA, or a guy who still has his own shipping business to run the Post Office, or a person who lobbies on behalf of for-profit colleges to run the education department. But in America, we draw the line at guns. If you’ve ever suggested that maybe gun control might be a good thing amid hundreds (thousands?) of mass-shootings, you are disqualified from a job which requires you to… control guns.



			https://wapo.st/2X1B2Il
		


By the way, of course Joe Manchin gets his name into the story. He’s West Virginia’s Ted Cruz - 100% self-promotion. He will make sure the Dems never pass anything, because if they do pass something, the news won’t be about JOE MANCHIN that day.


----------



## Thomas Veil

So the arrogant, conniving prostitutes over in Columbus decided what we needed was more gun laws—_their_ kind of gun laws.



> One bill would make it more accessible for teachers to carry guns in schools, the other would make a permit and training to carry optional.




So now I have to worry that the person teaching my grandkids is packing?

Or that there are people on the street carrying who may not even know how to handle a gun?

Thanks, Ohio GOP. 









						2 gun laws pass Ohio House, advance to the Senate
					

One bill would make it more accessible for teachers to carry guns in schools, the other would make a permit and training to carry optional.




					www.wkyc.com


----------



## Huntn

SuperMatt said:


> Biden is withdrawing the nomination for the head of the ATF (bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms) because he is an alcoholic…. Hahaha just kidding, it’s because he owns stock in tobacco companies….. anahahahahaahha just kidding, it’s because he supports gun control.
> 
> So, yeah… it was perfectly ok for fossil fuel lobbyists to run the EPA, or a guy who still has his own shipping business to run the Post Office, or a person who lobbies on behalf of for-profit colleges to run the education department. But in America, we draw the line at guns. If you’ve ever suggested that maybe gun control might be a good thing amid hundreds (thousands?) of mass-shootings, you are disqualified from a job which requires you to… control guns.
> 
> 
> 
> https://wapo.st/2X1B2Il
> 
> 
> 
> By the way, of course Joe Manchin gets his name into the story. He’s West Virginia’s Ted Cruz - 100% self-promotion. He will make sure the Dems never pass anything, because if they do pass something, the news won’t be about JOE MANCHIN that day.



Stop cheering me up,


----------



## Yoused

Convicted felon tries to take a gun past security at the Atlanta airport, kerfuffle, gun goes off, etc, etc,









						Atlanta airport checkpoint chaos: Man grabs gun, it goes off
					

ATLANTA (AP) — A passenger awaiting a search at the Atlanta airport's main security checkpoint reached in his bag and grabbed a firearm, and it went off, causing chaos among travelers and prompting a temporary FAA ground stop on flights Saturday afternoon, officials said.




					apnews.com
				




The story says that, as of October 3rd, TSA has confiscated about 4500 firearms at airport security. I mean, come on, people. Does the stupid run that deep in this dirtpatch?


----------



## JayMysteri0

A little video to go along with

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1462135561552994313/

"Guns everywhere" in America...


----------



## Alli

Yoused said:


> Convicted felon tries to take a gun past security at the Atlanta airport, kerfuffle, gun goes off, etc, etc,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Atlanta airport checkpoint chaos: Man grabs gun, it goes off
> 
> 
> ATLANTA (AP) — A passenger awaiting a search at the Atlanta airport's main security checkpoint reached in his bag and grabbed a firearm, and it went off, causing chaos among travelers and prompting a temporary FAA ground stop on flights Saturday afternoon, officials said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apnews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The story says that, as of October 3rd, TSA has confiscated about 4500 firearms at airport security. I mean, come on, people. Does the stupid run that deep in this dirtpatch?



Georgia.

The Deep South.

Need I say more?


----------



## Joe

Y’all need to start packing if y’all aren’t already. Y’all gonna look real silly when shit turns to Gilead from Trump supporters and all you have is a banana lol


----------



## Huntn

Yoused said:


> Convicted felon tries to take a gun past security at the Atlanta airport, kerfuffle, gun goes off, etc, etc,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Atlanta airport checkpoint chaos: Man grabs gun, it goes off
> 
> 
> ATLANTA (AP) — A passenger awaiting a search at the Atlanta airport's main security checkpoint reached in his bag and grabbed a firearm, and it went off, causing chaos among travelers and prompting a temporary FAA ground stop on flights Saturday afternoon, officials said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apnews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The story says that, as of October 3rd, TSA has confiscated about 4500 firearms at airport security. I mean, come on, people. Does the stupid run that deep in this dirtpatch?



Clearly STUPID, look at the politics there.


----------



## ericwn

JagRunner said:


> Y’all need to start packing if y’all aren’t already. Y’all gonna look real silly when shit turns to Gilead from Trump supporters and all you have is a banana lol




This reminds me of a Monty Python sketch:


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Yoused said:


> Convicted felon tries to take a gun past security at the Atlanta airport, kerfuffle, gun goes off, etc, etc,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Atlanta airport checkpoint chaos: Man grabs gun, it goes off
> 
> 
> ATLANTA (AP) — A passenger awaiting a search at the Atlanta airport's main security checkpoint reached in his bag and grabbed a firearm, and it went off, causing chaos among travelers and prompting a temporary FAA ground stop on flights Saturday afternoon, officials said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apnews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The story says that, as of October 3rd, TSA has confiscated about 4500 firearms at airport security. I mean, come on, people. Does the stupid run that deep in this dirtpatch?




I heard recently that at LAX about a decade ago the TSA agents can be bribed pretty easily to let all kinds of contraband through, like a couple hundred dollars and you're set.  I wonder how many of those confiscated firearms are the result of the carrier not going to the right agent that was paid off.


----------



## SuperMatt

We definitely need more guns in America. Why should people talk out their differences when they can shoot them out instead?









						Woman lights gaming machine on fire after losing, shot by fellow gamer who couldn’t play anymore, HPD says
					

A woman was injured during a shooting in northeast Houston Tuesday afternoon, according to Houston police.




					www.click2houston.com


----------



## Joe

SuperMatt said:


> We definitely need more guns in America. Why should people talk out their differences when they can shoot them out instead?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Woman lights gaming machine on fire after losing, shot by fellow gamer who couldn’t play anymore, HPD says
> 
> 
> A woman was injured during a shooting in northeast Houston Tuesday afternoon, according to Houston police.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.click2houston.com




We're not going to get rid of guns in America no matter how hard some people try. Its been built into our culture since the beginning of this country. The sooner democrats realize this the better off they'll be in elections. Beto will lose the Texas governor's race based on his recent comments about taking people's guns. He will lose on that one issue alone. 

I lean left and I support the 2A. Every single person I know that leans left supports the 2A. The people in the story are idiots. They would have been idiots with or without the gun.


----------



## SuperMatt

JagRunner said:


> We're not going to get rid of guns in America no matter how hard some people try. Its been built into our culture since the beginning of this country. The sooner democrats realize this the better off they'll be in elections. Beto will lose the Texas governor's race based on his recent comments about taking people's guns. He will lose on that one issue alone.
> 
> I lean left and I support the 2A. Every single person I know that leans left supports the 2A. The people in the story are idiots. They would have been idiots with or without the gun.



Sure they would still be idiots, but nobody would be in the hospital with a gunshot wound. Kyle Rittenhouse is an idiot, and 2 people are dead because he had a gun.

Guns increase the suicide rate dramatically too.

I support the 2nd amendment too, when read in its entirety. Sadly, modern right-wing interpretation of it forgets about “well regulated” and wants no regulations on guns whatsoever.


----------



## Joe

SuperMatt said:


> Sure they would still be idiots, but nobody would be in the hospital with a gunshot wound. Kyle Rittenhouse is an idiot, and 2 people are dead because he had a gun.
> 
> Guns increase the suicide rate dramatically too.
> 
> I support the 2nd amendment too, when read in its entirety. Sadly, modern right-wing interpretation of it forgets about “well regulated” and wants no regulations on guns whatsoever.




Republicans know how to lie, cheat and scare people. That is how they win elections. Any regulation that democrats want to do even if it's not taking guns away from people they'll spin it that way. Democrats have no spine and let Republicans bully them. And they get away with it. I'm waiting for the day democrats get a spine. I think that will happen with the younger generation growing up. *fingers crossed*


----------



## SuperMatt

JagRunner said:


> Republicans know how to lie, cheat and scare people. That is how they win elections. Any regulation that democrats want to do even if it's not taking guns away from people they'll spin it that way. Democrats have no spine and let Republicans bully them. And they get away with it. I'm waiting for the day democrats get a spine. I think that will happen with the younger generation growing up. *fingers crossed*



The right wingers are already spinning that Biden “ran as a moderate but is ruling as a progressive.” As for what these “progressive” policies he’s passed are that he didn’t run on, they have nothing. They just say it as if it’s true even though it’s not. 

I say Democrats should pass the agenda they ran on, because the GOP will attack with exaggerations and/or outright lies no matter what they do. People love to hate on “the squad” but I think they are Democrats with spines.


----------



## SuperMatt

Another situation that could have been prevented with MOAR GUNZ:









						‘I was shocked it was over a $6 pizza’ | Worker recalls moments after man pulls rifle on employees
					

A Knoxville man is in custody after allegedly threatening Little Caesars employees after he was told his pizza would take ten minutes to make.




					www.wvlt.tv
				




If everybody that worked at Little Caesar’s was packing heat too, they could have solved this with a shootout instead of some innocent person needing to give this guy her pizza and the police needing to be called.


----------



## Eric

Florida summed up in a single tweet.


Florida, USA from
      WhitePeopleTwitter


----------



## Joe

Thoughts and prayers


----------



## User.45

JagRunner said:


> Y’all need to start packing if y’all aren’t already. Y’all gonna look real silly when shit turns to Gilead from Trump supporters and all you have is a banana lol



Are we gunning for this?









						Pregnant hit-and-run driver fatally shot in road rage incident she allegedly started, police say
					

A pregnant woman was shot and killed in a road rage incident that stemmed from a hit-and-run crash over the weekend on a Florida street, police said Monday. The incident unfolded after a 40-year-ol…




					ktla.com
				





> A pregnant woman was shot and killed in a road rage incident that stemmed from a hit-and-run crash over the weekend on a Florida street, police said Monday.
> The incident unfolded after a 40-year-old motorcyclist was struck by a Kia in Orange City Saturday evening, according to local authorities.
> Orange City Police Department officials allege that 35-year-old Sara Morales “intentionally hit” Andrew Derr in the area of the 1400 block of North Volusia Avenue, then fled the minor crash scene.
> Derr was uninjured and remained on the motorcycle. He and witnesses tried to get Morales to stop while she was attempting to turn left onto Wisconsin Avenue.
> She refused to pull over and they followed the woman in an effort to identify her, according to a Police Department news release.
> Morales drove to the 1000 block of Wisconsin Avenue, where she went into her home and called 911. She allegedly grabbed a gun from the house and went back outside to confront Derr and the witnesses.
> Derr had a handgun on him, and he drew the weapon and opened fire on Morales, hitting her multiple times, according to police. They say he had a valid Florida permit to carry a concealed weapon.
> Morales was rushed to a hospital where she was pronounced dead.




Well regulated militia my ass...


----------



## SuperMatt

P_X said:


> Are we gunning for this?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pregnant hit-and-run driver fatally shot in road rage incident she allegedly started, police say
> 
> 
> A pregnant woman was shot and killed in a road rage incident that stemmed from a hit-and-run crash over the weekend on a Florida street, police said Monday. The incident unfolded after a 40-year-ol…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ktla.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well regulated militia my ass...



Which one of them was the good guy with a gun?


----------



## Joe

She played a stupid game, she won a stupid prize. The guy on the motorcycle she tried to run over with her car defended himself.


----------



## SuperMatt

JagRunner said:


> She played a stupid game, she won a stupid prize. The guy on the motorcycle she tried to run over with her car defended himself.



. Did you even read the story?


----------



## Yoused

SuperMatt said:


> . Did you even read the story?



I have looked at several versions, and none of them cover the nature of the initial altercation where she tried to run him down. Motorcyclists can be assholes. On the other hand, a person in a car ("cager") is significantly less vulnerable than a person on a bike, so yeah, trying to run down a biker, no matter why, is all kinds of wrong.

Of course, one story I read said that he finished her with a shotgun. A guy on a bike who has a shotgun close at hand? That is kind of odd.

We all make mistakes. I piss people off by behaving reasonably, because reasonable is not the order of the day. I try to hope that people forgive me when I make a rude mistake, and most of the time they do. Like today, when I took the long loop home, turned onto the side road behind the guy in the Silverado, and he decided to become a squirrel, fishtailing and bootlegging all over the road for no good reason. I stopped and let him finish his road-tirade, because who wants to get hit? He was being an asshole, but I got over it, as well as, apparently, did the other three cars that avoided getting hit by him.

It is a weird balance, trying to figure out who needs their ass handed to them and who should be answered with _oops, meh_, but we have become way too confrontational in this country. The assholes seem to thrive on getting a reaction (proudboys v blm/antifa, for example), so feeding their need for attention seems like an ill-considered strategy.


----------



## SuperMatt

Yoused said:


> I have looked at several versions, and none of them cover the nature of the initial altercation where she tried to run him down. Motorcyclists can be assholes. On the other hand, a person in a car ("cager") is significantly less vulnerable than a person on a bike, so yeah, trying to run down a biker, no matter why, is all kinds of wrong.
> 
> Of course, one story I read said that he finished her with a shotgun. A guy on a bike who has a shotgun close at hand? That is kind of odd.
> 
> We all make mistakes. I piss people off by behaving reasonably, because reasonable is not the order of the day. I try to hope that people forgive me when I make a rude mistake, and most of the time they do. Like today, when I took the long loop home, turned onto the side road behind the guy in the Silverado, and he decided to become a squirrel, fishtailing and bootlegging all over the road for no good reason. I stopped and let him finish his road-tirade, because who wants to get hit? He was being an asshole, but I got over it, as well as, apparently, did the other three cars that avoided getting hit by him.
> 
> It is a weird balance, trying to figure out who needs their ass handed to them and who should be answered with _oops, meh_, but we have become way too confrontational in this country. The assholes seem to thrive on getting a reaction (proudboys v blm/antifa, for example), so feeding their need for attention seems like an ill-considered strategy.



The collision was a fender bender with no injuries. The person on the motorcycle proceeded to follow the driver to her home and killed her. That is NOT a reasonable response to a fender bender, even if the person flees the scene. If somebody follows you to your house after a minor collision, it makes sense you would call 911 right away. Unlike this woman, I would lock my door and wait for the police to arrive instead of confronting a crazy person with a gun. Maybe she thought it would scare him away.

In the end, a person is dead because both people had guns.

Side note: I find it interesting that the report said the shooter and “witnesses” followed her to her home. My guess would be that he was in a group of bikers and they all followed her home? So now you’ve got a biker gang following you home…yeah I see why she would call 911. The so-called witnesses are definitely not random bystanders, because no random bystander is going to follow a random person home after they witness a minor collision.



> Police say Morales continued to her home at 1052 East Wisconsin Avenue, went inside and came out with a gun to confront Derr and the other witnesses, who had continued to follow.
> 
> “You’re three men. You followed me. Leave me alone,” Morales shouts as multiple gunshots are heard.











						Watch: Bodycam shows tense moments after library assistant was shot in road rage incident
					

In the video, you can see officers ordering Andrew Derr to the ground at gunpoint before detaining him.




					www.wftv.com


----------



## fooferdoggie

SuperMatt said:


> The collision was a fender bender with no injuries. The person on the motorcycle proceeded to follow the driver to her home and killed her. That is NOT a reasonable response to a fender bender, even if the person flees the scene. If somebody follows you to your house after a minor collision, it makes sense you would call 911 right away. Unlike this woman, I would lock my door and wait for the police to arrive instead of confronting a crazy person with a gun. Maybe she thought it would scare him away.
> 
> In the end, a person is dead because both people had guns.
> 
> Side note: I find it interesting that the report said the shooter and “witnesses” followed her to her home. My guess would be that he was in a group of bikers and they all followed her home? So now you’ve got a biker gang following you home…yeah I see why she would call 911. The so-called witnesses are definitely not random bystanders, because no random bystander is going to follow a random person home after they witness a minor collision.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Watch: Bodycam shows tense moments after library assistant was shot in road rage incident
> 
> 
> In the video, you can see officers ordering Andrew Derr to the ground at gunpoint before detaining him.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.wftv.com



thats what I got out of it. should have called the cops. but this is Florida as I posted this in the Florida man thread.


----------



## Yoused

SuperMatt said:


> The collision was a fender bender with no injuries.



If a motorcycle was involved, I would not call it a "fender bender".


----------



## SuperMatt

Yoused said:


> If a motorcycle was involved, I would not call it a "fender bender".



The police called it a ”minor crash” and said that Derr was not injured or ejected from him motorcycle. Sorry for my colloquialism of “fender bender” which was used where I grew up to denote a minor collision where nobody got hurt. And it sounds like his motorcycle was operable since he used it to chase the woman home and kill her.


----------



## Joe

SuperMatt said:


> . Did you even read the story?




Yes, she intentionally hit him with her car while he was on a motorcycle, which was confirmed by the witnesses in the article. The guy on the motorcycle and the witnesses tried to get her to stop while they called 911. She did not stop and they followed her home and were outside on the street talking to 911 when she came out with a gun pointed at them. She came out with a gun pointed at them. Self defense at that point. If she had simply come out without a gun she would be alive.


----------



## Joe

SuperMatt said:


> The collision was a fender bender with no injuries. The person on the motorcycle proceeded to follow the driver to her home and killed her. That is NOT a reasonable response to a fender bender, even if the person flees the scene. If somebody follows you to your house after a minor collision, it makes sense you would call 911 right away. Unlike this woman, I would lock my door and wait for the police to arrive instead of confronting a crazy person with a gun. Maybe she thought it would scare him away.
> 
> In the end, a person is dead because both people had guns.
> 
> Side note: I find it interesting that the report said the shooter and “witnesses” followed her to her home. My guess would be that he was in a group of bikers and they all followed her home? So now you’ve got a biker gang following you home…yeah I see why she would call 911. The so-called witnesses are definitely not random bystanders, because no random bystander is going to follow a random person home after they witness a minor collision.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Watch: Bodycam shows tense moments after library assistant was shot in road rage incident
> 
> 
> In the video, you can see officers ordering Andrew Derr to the ground at gunpoint before detaining him.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.wftv.com




You keep trying to make this lady into a victim. SHE hit the guy on the motorcycle and left the scene. SHE came out of her home with a gun pointed at them. She was the aggressor. You don't point a gun at someone unless you plan to shoot it. If she had just stayed inside her home while both people were on the phone with 911 she would be alive.


----------



## User.45

JagRunner said:


> Yes, she intentionally hit him with her car while he was on a motorcycle, which was confirmed by the witnesses in the article. The guy on the motorcycle and the witnesses tried to get her to stop while they called 911. She did not stop and they followed her home and were outside on the street talking to 911 when she came out with a gun pointed at them. She came out with a gun pointed at them. Self defense at that point. If she had simply come out without a gun she would be alive.



Again, survivors get to tell their stories. If neither of them were armed everybody would be alive. Again, you don't arm children, and a significant portion of the populace are fully grown children.

But seriously, explain to me what all of this has to do with a "well regulated militia." The general interpretation of 2A is really absurd. Also, let's say it's an inalienable right to bear arms. We could still penalize people whose firearms are used for crimes. It would be a decent compromise for an adult society. You can have all the guns you want, but it's also your responsibility that those aren't abused. People want all the "fun" with the gun but none of the responsibility. Again, we are full of armed children.


----------



## Joe

P_X said:


> Again, survivors get to tell their stories. If neither of them were armed everybody would be alive. Again, you don't arm children, and a significant portion of the populace are fully grown children.
> 
> But seriously, explain to me what all of this has to do with a "*well regulated militia." The general interpretation of 2A is really absurd.* Also, let's say it's an inalienable right to bear arms. We could still penalize people whose firearms are used for crimes. It would be a decent compromise for an adult society. You can have all the guns you want, but it's also your responsibility that those aren't abused. People want all the "fun" with the gun but none of the responsibility. Again, we are full of armed children.




I agree with you there. But at this point in time you are not going to get anything changed. It is American culture. Guns are American culture. The right knows how to spin everything and you'll continue to lose elections because of it. Because they know how to scare people into "they're coming for your guns!" and democrats don't have a spine to defend their stance or get anything done. I'm really tired of wimpy democrats.


----------



## SuperMatt

JagRunner said:


> Yes, she intentionally hit him with her car while he was on a motorcycle, which was confirmed by the witnesses in the article. The guy on the motorcycle and the witnesses tried to get her to stop while they called 911. She did not stop and they followed her home and were outside on the street talking to 911 when she came out with a gun pointed at them. She came out with a gun pointed at them. Self defense at that point. If she had simply come out without a gun she would be alive.



Wrong. You can’t follow somebody home after a minor crash and threaten them, then when they come out with a gun to get you to leave their property, you shoot them in “self defense.” You realize the only living witnesses speaking so far are the biker buddies of the killer, right?

Read this article about the castle doctrine in Florida. The woman had a right to do what she did:









						A Complete Guide to The Florida Castle Doctrine Law
					

If you've lived in Florida for a while, you've probably heard of the Florida castle doctrine law. The castle doctrine gives you the legal right to use or threaten the use of a firearm when you are located inside of your castle. This would include your residence, dwelling, or an occupied vehicle...




					www.tampacarry.com
				




The family of the woman who died needs to press charges and this guy and his accomplices need to be held accountable. They were on her property, threatening her.

I still maintain though - if nobody had guns, nobody in this situation would be dead.


----------



## SuperMatt

JagRunner said:


> You keep trying to make this lady into a victim. SHE hit the guy on the motorcycle and left the scene. SHE came out of her home with a gun pointed at them. She was the aggressor. You don't point a gun at someone unless you plan to shoot it. If she had just stayed inside her home while both people were on the phone with 911 she would be alive.



She is the victim. She is dead. Angry bikers followed her home and shot her on her own property.


----------



## Yoused

SuperMatt said:


> She is the victim. She is dead. Angry bikers followed her home and shot her on her own property.



You know, I have somehow managed to not ever have inflamed a horde of bikers against me.


----------



## SuperMatt

Yoused said:


> You know, I have somehow managed to not ever have inflamed a horde of bikers against me.



The night is still young…


----------



## User.45

JagRunner said:


> I agree with you there. But at this point in time you are not going to get anything changed. It is American culture. Guns are American culture. The right knows how to spin everything and you'll continue to lose elections because of it. Because they know how to scare people into "they're coming for your guns!" and democrats don't have a spine to defend their stance or get anything done. I'm really tired of wimpy democrats.



This attitude is really frustrating. Give up on all principles because of mental children. People normalizing school or hospital active shooter drills are sick. And people choosing these drills over fixing or at least mitigating the situation are true cowards. It's not only the politicians' responsibility to debunk all the fake propaganda around gun ownership. It's ours, including you.

1. Access to a firearm is associated with increased risk of becoming a homicide victim
2. Shootings are the third leading cause of death in youth younger than 19.
3. The USA has more guns than inhabitants.
4. It takes 4 years for Americans to "lose" a million guns because of the sloppy gun storing habits
5. Rural White Southerners lose the most guns.
6. Crime prevention numbers attributed to owning a gun are literally made up
7. Homicide rates in the USA are way higher than in the EU or Canada, and the difference is primarily driven the ones involving firearms.

(these are the rebuttals of the most common pro-gun arguments I've heard and none of these took me longer than a 15 min google scholar search to verify)


----------



## Cmaier

Yoused said:


> You know, I have somehow managed to not ever have inflamed a horde of bikers against me.



 I believe a quantity of angry bikers is called a helloton. I’ll keep working on that.


----------



## Yoused

SuperMatt said:


> The night is still young…



Well, that one guy that parked his Fat Bob outside failed to see me attaching playing cards to his forks to make noise in his spokes, so I think I am safe. For now.


----------



## Joe

SuperMatt said:


> She is the victim. She is dead. Angry bikers followed her home and shot her on her own property.




Bikers followed her home after she hit them with their vehicle and failed to stop. You make it seem like they followed her for no reason. It was a hit and run. They were outside waiting for the cops to arrive when she came out with a gun pointed at them. One of the rules of gun ownership is don't point a gun at someone if you don't intend to shoot. She seems like a horrible gun owner, and it cost her her life. I'm sure someone in the neighborhood had cameras so more will come out.


----------



## Yoused

I stand by my assertion: guns make people stupid. _I do not need to avoid pissing people off, because, if they come after me, I can shoot them in self defense_.

It upsets people when I say that, but I have seen the evidence. If you do not have that fallback, you tend to behave more circumspectly.


----------



## SuperMatt

JagRunner said:


> Bikers followed her home after she hit them with their vehicle and failed to stop. You make it seem like they followed her for no reason. It was a hit and run. They were outside waiting for the cops to arrive when she came out with a gun pointed at them. One of the rules of gun ownership is don't point a gun at someone if you don't intend to shoot. She seems like a horrible gun owner, and it cost her her life. I'm sure someone in the neighborhood had cameras so more will come out.



Wrong. Fleeing the scene of a minor crash is a misdemeanor. All they need is the license plate, and call the cops. Presumably they could have gotten the plate number and left. They took justice into their own hands instead.

You’re entitled to your opinion on this, but if you kill a person that is in their own house after you followed them home with a group of your friends, it seems to me unlikely you can claim self-defense. There was no need for you to chase the person home. And if you did… when they came out of their home with a gun, you should have left.

The misdemeanor hit-and-run issue is NOT a justification to follow somebody home and trespass on their property.

The penalty for a hit-and-run with no injuries is NOT death by vigilante. I hope this guy does some serious time in prison. I don’t want people to think they can chase people home whenever they get road rage and shoot them and get away with it.

But on the larger issue - more guns = more violence. The NRA claims it is the other way around but they are straight-up lying.


----------



## User.45

Yoused said:


> I stand by my assertion: guns make people stupid. _I do not need to avoid pissing people off, because, if they come after me, I can shoot them in self defense_.
> 
> It upsets people when I say that, but I have seen the evidence. If you do not have that fallback, you tend to behave more circumspectly.



Exhibit A (this is really disturbing, but hey, this' what the gun do)

Man tries to pick up his son from his exes house and gets shot twice by by his sons stepfather. from
      PublicFreakout


----------



## Joe

SuperMatt said:


> Wrong. Fleeing the scene of a minor crash is a misdemeanor. All they need is the license plate, and call the cops. Presumably they could have gotten the plate number and left. They took justice into their own hands instead.
> 
> You’re entitled to your opinion on this, but if you kill a person that is in their own house after you followed them home with a group of your friends, it seems to me unlikely you can claim self-defense. There was no need for you to chase the person home. And if you did… when they came out of their home with a gun, you should have left.
> 
> The misdemeanor hit-and-run issue is NOT a justification to follow somebody home and trespass on their property.
> 
> The penalty for a hit-and-run with no injuries is NOT death by vigilante. I hope this guy does some serious time in prison. I don’t want people to think they can chase people home whenever they get road rage and shoot them and get away with it.
> 
> But on the larger issue - more guns = more violence. The NRA claims it is the other way around but they are straight-up lying.




The street in front of her home isn’t her property. The sidewalk isn’t either.

I’m just trying to wrap my head around calling her the victim when she’s the one that came out with a gun pointed at them after she fled the scene of a hit and run. Hmmmmm Next time you get hit and the person flees make sure you send them some flowers and candy. They’re the victim. It’s just a misdemeanor! 

She played a stupid game and won a stupid prize.  #thoughtsandprayers


----------



## User.45

JagRunner said:


> The street in front of her home isn’t her property. The sidewalk isn’t either.
> 
> I’m just trying to wrap my head around calling her the victim when she’s the one that came out with a gun pointed at them after she fled the scene of a hit and run. Hmmmmm Next time you get hit and the person flees make sure you send them some flowers and candy. They’re the victim. It’s just a misdemeanor!
> 
> She played a stupid game and won a stupid prize.  #thoughtsandprayers



The story absolutely doesn't add up at all. So #thoughtsandprayers should be preceded by #actualinvestigation.


----------



## SuperMatt

P_X said:


> The story absolutely doesn't add up at all. So #thoughtsandprayers should be preceded by #actualinvestigation.



Agreed. When I read the report that said ”witnesses” also followed her home… I realized that she was followed home by multiple people, probably all on motorcycles. Her final words made it sound like they were threatening her. It also sounded like she pulled a gun hoping it would scare them off.

But like you said, I don’t know what truly happened.

But we do know guns led to yet another unnecessary death.


----------



## Joe

Her vehicle almost lead to unnecessary deaths.


----------



## SuperMatt

JagRunner said:


> Her vehicle almost lead to unnecessary deaths.



There were no injuries. How did you go from a minor crash with no injuries to almost dying? Seems like you skipped multiple levels of severity there.


----------



## User.45

SuperMatt said:


> There were no injuries. How did you go from a minor crash with no injuries to almost dying? Seems like you skipped multiple levels of severity there.



It feels like there are male attitudes projected onto a pregnant female. It's just weird. It went viral on Reddit for the reason of it not making sense.


----------



## User.168

.


----------



## User.168

.


----------



## Edd

I’m rooting for FLA and TX to secede and show us all how it’s done.


----------



## User.45

How US gun culture stacks up with the world | CNN
					

Ubiquitous gun violence in the US has left few places unscathed over the decades. As the tally of gun-related deaths continue to grow daily, here's a look at how American gun culture compares to the rest of the world.




					www.cnn.com
				



_Ad nauseam_, yet this totally reminds me about discussing masks or vaccines. The answers are super obvious, but instead of mitigating risk, people prefer to question reality.


----------



## Joe

theSeb said:


> Wat? That's about as tenuous as saying that I almost died when I thought about running across the road. I hate to generalise, but 99% of bikers are wankers with leather and gang fetishes. They are cowards, but become brave in groups. There was clearly a minor fender bender. We don't know for sure what actually happened in the initial incident, but she may not have been paying attention and changed lanes when one of the wankers was going 30 mph over the speed limit filtering between the cars, because that is what the majority of bikers do every day and then get surprised and angry that someone dared to change lanes 150 yards ahead of them.
> 
> The bikers would have become angry and started to threaten to the woman. She felt threatened and drove off. The bikers then followed her home. I would be willing to bet that some mirrors got smashed on the way.
> 
> I have seen pretty much this exact scenario hundreds of times on youtube on the various road rage channels, which I binge watch occasionally. The best part is that these videos were sent in by the bikers themselves, because they truly believe that when a "cager" slightly inconveniences them they have a god-given right to smash their mirrors, or kick their car. The lone ones nearly always run away after that and then send in a video, because they feel that what they did was morally justified. They only stand and fight if there are a few bikers together.
> 
> Many years ago I was in one of these situations myself. I wanted to change lanes on the highway into the middle lane. There was a biker around 75 metres back cruising in that lane. I  indicated and double checked my mirrors and changed into the lane. He was still far away and I didn't cause him to slow down. He started waving his hand around and accelerated towards me. I, being a mature and reasonable 24 year old at the time, shrugged and showed him the middle finger of peace, because I was genuinely confused about what his issue was. He accelerated past me and punched my mirror. Luckily the car was like a tank and he didn't cause any damage, but I still chased the cowardly wanker. He ran away through traffic. If I had caught him, then that morning would have ended very differently.
> 
> I've had a gun waved in my face 4 times in my life growing up in a place with an intentional homicide rate 6 times higher than the US. I am still here, because even though I was young, I was never that stupid and I know how to defend myself and, most importantly, how to talk my way out of stupid situations. However, there is no doubt in mind that if I had taken up my parents on their offer to buy me a gun for my 21st birthday, my life would have been very different.




That’s a whole lot of assumptions lol 

She should have stayed in her home and waited for the cops, not come out with a gun.


----------



## User.45

JagRunner said:


> That’s a whole lot of assumptions lol
> 
> She should have stayed in her home and waited for the cops, not come out with a gun.



I see your point. Let's reward the more successful escalator. 
We could even gamify the thing for even more fun.


----------



## User.168

.


----------



## Joe

She would be alive if she didn’t come out with a gun pointed at them. Y’all seem to just think that’s no big deal. Because you hate bikers


----------



## Eric

P_X said:


> *Again, survivors get to tell their stories. If neither of them were armed everybody would be alive. Again, you don't arm children, and a significant portion of the populace are fully grown children.*
> 
> But seriously, explain to me what all of this has to do with a "well regulated militia." The general interpretation of 2A is really absurd. Also, let's say it's an inalienable right to bear arms. We could still penalize people whose firearms are used for crimes. It would be a decent compromise for an adult society. You can have all the guns you want, but it's also your responsibility that those aren't abused. People want all the "fun" with the gun but none of the responsibility. Again, we are full of armed children.



Exactly, if nobody was armed, nobody would've died. We hand out guns like candy to every dumbass out there without any thought given to whether or not their capable of making rational decisions.


----------



## SuperMatt

JagRunner said:


> She would be alive if she didn’t come out with a gun pointed at them. Y’all seem to just think that’s no big deal. Because you hate bikers



We don’t know that 100%. Maybe if she didn’t have a gun, Derr would have come into her house with his gun and murdered her anyway. And did she know they were armed? His weapon was concealed. She probably hoped waving her gun around would scare them off.

But most likely you are right. And if neither party was armed, it’s a near certainty she would still be alive.

This is just what happens when everybody has guns. People get in an argument over a fender bender and it ends in death.


----------



## Huntn

P_X said:


> Again, survivors get to tell their stories. If neither of them were armed everybody would be alive. Again, you don't arm children, and a significant portion of the populace are fully grown children.
> 
> But seriously, explain to me what all of this has to do with a "well regulated militia." The general interpretation of 2A is really absurd. Also, let's say it's an inalienable right to bear arms. We could still penalize people whose firearms are used for crimes. It would be a decent compromise for an adult society. You can have all the guns you want, but it's also your responsibility that those aren't abused. People want all the "fun" with the gun but none of the responsibility. Again, we are full of armed children.



Well regulated militias would be the State Guard, period. My understanding is that most States outlawed “private militias” after the Civil War, but I can’t say how many of those laws are still on the books.


----------



## Huntn

P_X said:


> Again, survivors get to tell their stories. If neither of them were armed everybody would be alive. Again, you don't arm children, and a significant portion of the populace are fully grown children.
> 
> But seriously, explain to me what all of this has to do with a "well regulated militia." The general interpretation of 2A is really absurd. Also, let's say it's an inalienable right to bear arms. We could still penalize people whose firearms are used for crimes. It would be a decent compromise for an adult society. You can have all the guns you want, but it's also your responsibility that those aren't abused. People want all the "fun" with the gun but none of the responsibility. Again, we are full of armed children.



Not countering you, just saying…
Owning a gun and bearing it does not mean it can’t be regulated, including when it can or can’t be beared.  The idea of blanket bearing your arms, as vaguely mentioned in the 2A was written during the time muskets and mostly rural living In a country who had just thrown off the yoke of a colonial power. It needs desperately to be updated, but that’s not happening during gun mania.


----------



## Huntn

P_X said:


> Exhibit A (this is really disturbing, but hey, this' what the gun do)
> 
> Man tries to pick up his son from his exes house and gets shot twice by by his sons stepfather. from
> PublicFreakout



Guns make it way to easy to kill on impulse, primarily because a gun offers the ability, kind of like making  you god and it goes to some people’s heads. Culturally we have a enormous issue since the gun movement started, backlash to gun control, of what the perception of reasonable is. If you have a gun and are allowed to use it without consequence, because you were having a disagreement with someone, and then allowed to use your personal feelings as a legally binding standard,_ I feared_, or at least I said I feared, then we are all in deep shit. Justifiable killing skyrocketing to all time highs, just because there is a gun present wielded by a human being. You best be fast on the draw to win the argument.


----------



## Yoused

theSeb said:


> …. I hate to generalise, but 99% of bikers are wankers with leather and gang fetishes. …



Then you should probably not do it, or try to do it in ways that are not so utterly absurd. I know for an absolute fact that 87.4% of all statistics are made up on the spot, but I also know from experience that the proportion of assholes to decent people is exactly the same for automobile drivers as it is for bikers, and the distribution of cowardice is the same.

But, bikers are significantly more vulnerable out on the road, and the fact that the biker was not injured could very well have been a difference of inches. The first rule of vehicle operation, which applies to bikes as well as cars and trucks, the prime duty of the motorist is to not let their vehicle hit stuff. Unintentionally or deliberately, you have absolutely no right whatsoever to make contact with anything nor anyone. Ever. No matter how pissed off you are. End of story.


----------



## SuperMatt

Yoused said:


> Then you should probably not do it, or try to do it in ways that are not so utterly absurd. I know for an absolute fact that 87.4% of all statistics are made up on the spot, but I also know from experience that the proportion of assholes to decent people is exactly the same for automobile drivers as it is for bikers, and the distribution of cowardice is the same.
> 
> But, bikers are significantly more vulnerable out on the road, and the fact that the biker was not injured could very well have been a difference of inches. The first rule of vehicle operation, which applies to bikes as well as cars and trucks, the prime duty of the motorist is to not let their vehicle hit stuff. Unintentionally or deliberately, you have absolutely no right whatsoever to make contact with anything nor anyone. Ever. No matter how pissed off you are. End of story.



But you can shoot anybody that makes you _feel_ threatened. Ain’t America Great?


----------



## User.45

Huntn said:


> Well regulated militias would be the State Guard, period. My understanding is that most States outlawed “private militias” after the Civil War, but I can’t say how many of those laws are still on the books.





Huntn said:


> Not countering you, just saying…
> Owning a gun and bearing it does not mean it can’t be regulated, including when it can or can’t be beared.  The idea of blanket bearing your arms, as vaguely mentioned in the 2A was written during the time muskets and mostly rural living In a country who had just thrown off the yoke of a colonial power. It needs desperately to be updated, but that’s not happening during gun mania.




Yup, that's exactly my point. I've yet to meet a person waving 2A to actually  provide an interpretation of the actual text. I personally think that if it's the same sentence, you cannot dissociate the militia part from the bear Arms part. The other thing is, as I mentioned, neither interpretation of 2A precludes criminal accountability regarding what happens with _your_ firearm. 



Yoused said:


> I know for an absolute fact that 87.4% of all statistics are made up on the spot, but I also know from experience that the proportion of assholes to decent people is exactly the same for automobile drivers as it is for bikers, and the distribution of cowardice is the same.



Luckily, someone made up these stats for us already and they smell like a locker room and jock straps:



> *Motorcyclists exhibited higher scores for the temperament factors of novelty seeking and persistence and lower scores for harm avoidance and reward dependence in comparison to the Brazilian population).* Considering the reason for motorcycle use, the group of riders that used their motorcycles for work exhibited more temperament factors associated with risk behaviors than those who did not. *It was observed that 68.9% of them had low Harm Avoidance (HA) factor scores, whereas 72.1% had high Novelty Seeking (NS) factor scores.*











						Personality traits and risky behavior among motorcyclists: An exploratory study
					

Background Personality traits have been associated with a series of dysfunctional behaviors, ranging from violence to drug abuse and other risky behaviors. However, few studies have investigated motorcycle riders’ personality traits, and no research using the psychobiological model of...




					journals.plos.org


----------



## SuperMatt

__





						Thanksgiving Shooting Sees 13-Year-Old Kill 5-Year-Old at Family Gathering
					





					www.msn.com
				




If only there was a “good guy with a gun“ there, right?

Still too soon to discuss gun control…


----------



## Herdfan

JagRunner said:


> Republicans know how to lie, cheat and scare people. That is how they win elections. Any regulation that democrats want to do even if it's not taking guns away from people they'll spin it that way. Democrats have no spine and let Republicans bully them. And they get away with it. I'm waiting for the day democrats get a spine. I think that will happen with the younger generation growing up. *fingers crossed*




I am fine with reasonable regulation.

The problem is you have those like Beto, who flat out says he wants to take them, so all Dems get painted as such.  The other problem is half the "proposed regulations" won't do anything to combat gun violence.  I would equate them to "busywork" given to a student just to keep them busy while not teaching them anything.


----------



## Herdfan

SuperMatt said:


> Wrong. You can’t follow somebody home after a minor crash




You also can't leave the scene of an accident.  Which by every account I have read, she did.


----------



## User.45

SuperMatt said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanksgiving Shooting Sees 13-Year-Old Kill 5-Year-Old at Family Gathering
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.msn.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If only there was a “good guy with a gun“ there, right?
> 
> Still too soon to discuss gun control…






> In a similar incident in October, police said they believed a teenager who was playing with a gun in Connecticut accidentally shot and killed a 16-year-old boy.
> 
> According to Nationwide Children's Hospital in Columbus, Ohio, more than 1,300 children in the U.S. are killed by guns each year."
> 
> The American Academy of Pediatrics believes the best way to prevent gun-related injuries to children is to remove guns from the home. However, if you choose to keep a gun in the house, it is important that it is unloaded and locked, and the ammunition is stored and locked in a separate location," Nationwide Children's Hospital wrote.




Takes us back to what I've been repeating over and over again. People need to be held criminally accountable for what happens with their guns.


----------



## Joe

P_X said:


> Takes us back to what I've been repeating over and over again. People need to be held criminally accountable for what happens with their guns.




They are charging the people from the thanksgiving shooting.


----------



## User.45

JagRunner said:


> They are charging the people from the thanksgiving shooting.



Possibly maybe:
"The owner of the firearm *could* also be charged as well."


----------



## Yoused

That one story has this link at the bottom









						2-year-old fatally shoots father with rifle in accident
					

Unintentional shootings by children increased during the pandemic, according to the American Academy of Pediatrics.




					www.newsweek.com
				




The story says it was "an accident", which pisses me off. There are no "accidents" with guns, just fuckups, which guns tend to make worse.

And I shudder to think about that child as a teenager, when cousin Louise says, "_You killed your dad_," and that person does not believe her.


----------



## SuperMatt

JagRunner said:


> They are charging the people from the thanksgiving shooting.



They are charging the 13-year old kid. Does he even know how a gun works? Did he know it was a real gun? America - blame kids for shooting a gun, not the gun lobby, not the parents… what a crappy system. Anytime a kid gets a hold of a gun, there should be automatic penalties for the gun owner. If we had that, maybe they would take securing their guns seriously.


----------



## SuperMatt

Yoused said:


> That one story has this link at the bottom
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2-year-old fatally shoots father with rifle in accident
> 
> 
> Unintentional shootings by children increased during the pandemic, according to the American Academy of Pediatrics.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The story says it was "an accident", which pisses me off. There are no "accidents" with guns, just fuckups, which guns tend to make worse.
> 
> And I shudder to think about that child as a teenager, when cousin Louise says, "_You killed your dad_," and that person does not believe her.



Reading about the many shootings by little kids who were playing with a gun left by the parents in that article…


----------



## Joe

SuperMatt said:


> They are charging the 13-year old kid. Does he even know how a gun works? Did he know it was a real gun? America - blame kids for shooting a gun, not the gun lobby, not the parents… what a crappy system. Anytime a kid gets a hold of a gun, there should be automatic penalties for the gun owner. If we had that, maybe they would take securing their guns seriously.




They are going to charge the gun owner too.


----------



## Yoused

SuperMatt said:


> They are charging the 13-year old kid. Does he even know how a gun works?



Good Og, man, 13? Of course a thirteen year old knows how a gun works. I knew how guns work at 10, and I am not all that bright.


----------



## Joe

Yoused said:


> Good Og, man, 13? Of course a thirteen year old knows how a gun works. I knew how guns work at 10, and I am not all that bright.




I took a class in HS just to shoot guns LOL


----------



## User.45

Yoused said:


> Good Og, man, 13? Of course a thirteen year old knows how a gun works. I knew how guns work at 10, and I am not all that bright.





JagRunner said:


> I took a class in HS just to shoot guns LOL



Well, even better justification for criminal penalties for adults misplacing them. 



JagRunner said:


> They are going to charge the gun owner too.



Can you provide something more concrete than a maybe to justify this statement?


----------



## Edd

JagRunner said:


> I took a class in HS just to shoot guns LOL



Huh, we didn’t have that. Interesting.


----------



## Herdfan

JagRunner said:


> I took a class in HS just to shoot guns LOL




I want to say I learned in Boy Scouts.

The problem is the anti-gun crowd doesn't want even gun safety taught.  I made sure to teach my daughter if she was ever over at someone's house and a gun came out, leave immediately and find an adult.  She also knew never to touch one unless an adult was with her and shooting was the reason the gun was out.  

She got her first slide bite at 9.


----------



## Yoused

Herdfan said:


> I want to say I learned in Boy Scouts.



Yes. Boy Scouts start pretty early. I remember doing target shooting with .22s on a range, probably around age 9 or 10. Urban youth, of course, may not have as much access to those kind of activities.



> The problem is the anti-gun crowd doesn't want even gun safety taught.



That is just ridiculous.


----------



## SuperMatt

Herdfan said:


> .
> 
> The problem is the anti-gun crowd doesn't want even gun safety taught.



Flat-out wrong. Funny how states with gun control laws include a gun safety course as a requirement, and those are the laws opposed by the NRA. For example, Washington DC requires a gun safety course in order to register for a firearm license. The NRA opposes the requirement. So, it’s actually the NRA that is officially in opposition to a gun safety course requirement.

In this case, the evil anti-gun people asked for MORE gun safety training, and the GOP legislature wanted less safety training.









						Why Ohio lawmakers want less teacher gun training
					

School districts could set their own training requirements for armed employees under Republican legislation arising from a court battle over one…



					www.wcbe.org
				




Nobody can deny the danger of having hundreds of millions of guns, so the gun-worshippers resort to lies about the people trying to fix the problem.


----------



## Joe

SuperMatt said:


> Flat-out wrong. Funny how states with gun control laws include a gun safety course as a requirement, and those are the laws opposed by the NRA. For example, Washington DC requires a gun safety course in order to register for a firearm license. The NRA opposes the requirement. So, it’s actually the NRA that is officially in opposition to a gun safety course requirement.
> 
> In this case, the evil anti-gun people asked for MORE gun safety training, and the GOP legislature wanted less safety training.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why Ohio lawmakers want less teacher gun training
> 
> 
> School districts could set their own training requirements for armed employees under Republican legislation arising from a court battle over one…
> 
> 
> 
> www.wcbe.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nobody can deny the danger of having hundreds of millions of guns, so the gun-worshippers resort to lies about the people trying to fix the problem.




Which state are you located in?


----------



## Edd

JagRunner said:


> Which state are you located in?



Be a lot easier if everyone would just have this in their profile, just draws out conversations unnecessarily.


----------



## lizkat

Yoused said:


> Good Og, man, 13? Of course a thirteen year old knows how a gun works. I knew how guns work at 10, and I am not all that bright.




NYS just opened big game hunting for the first time to 12- and 13-yo, with proper licensing and "constant supervision" by licensed mentors.   It was an opt-in deal by county, with certain counties excluded due to being metro areas.   No other counties opted out.  To me this is at least better than what was happening before, which was 12- and 13-yos sometimes hunting at least deer without either license or supervision.  I'm not saying they were not trained how to shoot.  Just saying that now there's less wiggle room on consequences for the responsible adults if something goes wrong.

Of course they also just passed a law saying all hunters have to wear either blaze orange or pink, and of course it didn't take long for the first hunting fatality despite that law, because some hunter perceived movement by another hunter dressed in camouflage as "a deer".   It happened up near where one of my bros lives,  in a county near some of the Finger Lakes.  Some 61-yo guy in a tree stand took a shot at his 28-yo companion (tracking a deer the latter had shot but not killed), apparently mistaking him for a deer.  The younger guy was wearing camo and no blaze orange or pink. The older guy called 911 but first responders pronounced the younger hunter DOA at the scene.

Tragic, and the very reason the law was passed, to generate more publicity for a longstanding recommendation about clothing colors that humans register as "oh wow, there's another hunter"  but that don't actually look any different than camouflage attire to the eye of a deer.    Somebody either didn't get the memo or figured it didn't apply to them personally.

Of course there will be arguments about which of the two men was more careless,  and there are hunters who don't believe the thing about deer not being able to see an orange or pink splotched jacket as different to a camouflage pattern.    But then so much for "law abiding" hunters.


----------



## User.45

SuperMatt said:


> Flat-out wrong. Funny how states with gun control laws include a gun safety course as a requirement, and those are the laws opposed by the NRA. For example, Washington DC requires a gun safety course in order to register for a firearm license. The NRA opposes the requirement. So, it’s actually the NRA that is officially in opposition to a gun safety course requirement.
> 
> In this case, the evil anti-gun people asked for MORE gun safety training, and the GOP legislature wanted less safety training.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why Ohio lawmakers want less teacher gun training
> 
> 
> School districts could set their own training requirements for armed employees under Republican legislation arising from a court battle over one…
> 
> 
> 
> www.wcbe.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nobody can deny the danger of having hundreds of millions of guns, so the gun-worshippers resort to lies about the people trying to fix the problem.



it’s almost like when vaccine mandates were blamed for COVID deaths.


----------



## lizkat

Herdfan said:


> I want to say I learned in Boy Scouts.
> 
> The problem is the anti-gun crowd doesn't want even gun safety taught.  I made sure to teach my daughter if she was ever over at someone's house and a gun came out, leave immediately and find an adult.  She also knew never to touch one unless an adult was with her and shooting was the reason the gun was out.
> 
> She got her first slide bite at 9.




On the gun safety, uh no.    The rest I don't have a problem with since it does amount to part of what "gun safety instruction" is all about.... except to note that the gun lobby doesn't even want ER doctors discussing safe gun storage with families where a child has been wounded by gunshot in a home,  and that I find absurd and hope more courts up the line find it absurd as well.

The lobby's argument is that somehow a discussion like that amounts to illegal construction of a gun registry since it might cause a parent or guardian to cop to owning a gun, or keeping a gun in the house and in theory as long as a background check was done at purchase, and the purchaser is who was in possession of the gun at the time of the incident,  ownership is no one else's business.  This doesn't get around laws related to safe storage but the gun lobby is not working the "Do Not Discuss" angle in states with laws like that.  They run it in states like Florida or states that have not much gun control law at state level, and maybe only a "shall issue permit" law upon passage of background check.

The emergency room physicians have tried to argue that their First Amendment rights are constrained.   The gun lobby notes that First Amendment rights may not apply in an employer situation.  The physicians then argue that hospitals accepting US taxpayer funds means they do have a right to discuss whatever may make for a safer home for children.   Etc etc etc lawsuits stacked up to the ceiling throughout the courts system. 

Meanwhile the carnage goes on and the fact is that loaded guns and children even briefly unattended are a very risky mix.  Somehow the gun lobby has so far managed to keep Congress deciding for all of us that it's a risk that's in the range of acceptable in order to retain "the right to bear arms" in all its precious ambiguity regarding placement of a comma in the Second Amendment.


----------



## Yoused

SuperMatt said:


> Flat-out wrong. Funny how states with gun control laws include a gun safety course as a requirement, and those are the laws opposed by the NRA. For example, Washington DC requires a gun safety course in order to register for a firearm license. The NRA opposes the requirement.



The ammosexuals see any kind of a hint of a whisper for restraint on gun ownership as "_you wanna ban guns!_" and start their shrill chants of μολον λαβέ! Μολον λαβέ! *ΜΟΛΟΝ ΛΑΒΕ!!1!*


----------



## User.45

JagRunner said:


> They are going to charge the gun owner too.



Still awaiting the corroboration here. FYI, I know you're trying to avoid responding to my questions.


----------



## SuperMatt

P_X said:


> Still awaiting the corroboration here. FYI, I know you're trying to avoid responding to my questions.



Here’s another account of the incident:









						Brooklyn Park police say 13-year-old fatally shot boy, 5, while making a video to post on social media
					

Other children were at the scene and a gun was recovered, police said.




					www.startribune.com
				




Kids were making a video for social media. The 13-year old was arrested, but NOT the gun owner.

The police believe it was an accidental shooting by the teenager (forgive me for linking to facebook, but the police department chose that platform for distributing official information…)





__





						Facebook
					






					www.facebook.com


----------



## User.45

SuperMatt said:


> Here’s another account of the incident:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Brooklyn Park police say 13-year-old fatally shot boy, 5, while making a video to post on social media
> 
> 
> Other children were at the scene and a gun was recovered, police said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.startribune.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kids were making a video for social media. The 13-year old was arrested, but NOT the gun owner.
> 
> The police believe it was an accidental shooting by the teenager (forgive me for linking to facebook, but the police department chose that platform for distributing official information…)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Facebook
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.facebook.com



Yeah,  that's what I got too.


----------



## Herdfan

SuperMatt said:


> Flat-out wrong. Funny how states with gun control laws include a gun safety course as a requirement, and those are the laws opposed by the NRA. For example, Washington DC requires a gun safety course in order to register for a firearm license. The NRA opposes the requirement. So, it’s actually the NRA that is officially in opposition to a gun safety course requirement.
> 
> In this case, the evil anti-gun people asked for MORE gun safety training, and the GOP legislature wanted less safety training.




Well, we were talking about IN SCHOOLS.  Got to follow the whole context thing and not cherry pick parts of posts just so you can shout "You're wrong".


----------



## SuperMatt

Herdfan said:


> Well, we were talking about IN SCHOOLS.  Got to follow the whole context thing and not cherry pick parts of posts just so you can shout "You're wrong".




The article I linked is specifically about requiring more safety training in schools, even though you didn't specify in schools since you were talking about the Boy Scouts.


----------



## Herdfan

SuperMatt said:


> The article I linked is specifically about requiring more safety training in schools.




For armed school EMPLOYEES.  Not a thing in that article about teaching students gun safety.

And here is one where a principal is against teaching kids:



> "I don't think it should be dictated by a legislature that a school district should be teaching that. Our kids that handle guns, handle shotguns, hunt, when they do things like that, their families do a great job with making sure all the safety aspect are taught to them," said Webb.












						HB3173 to allow gun safety courses in Illinois schools, QPS reacts
					

House Bill 3173 is one step closer to getting passed and allowing schools to teach gun safety as part of their curriculum or as an after-school program. On April 22, House Bill 3173 passed the house with overwhelming support. 113 yays to 0 nays and on April 27, it had its first reading in the...




					khqa.com
				




The problem with his logic is that he assumes that only the kids who hunt or have families who shoot will come across guns.  Those aren't the kids I worry about, but instead someone from an gun-free household comes across one and has no idea what to do or not do with it.

The NRA has a program called Eddie Eagle, but The Center for Handgun Violence is against their program simply because it is from the NRA.

This is definitely one of those times I wish MR had left PRSI as Read-Only.  There was a whole thread about this very topic.


----------



## SuperMatt

Herdfan said:


> And here is one where a principal is against it:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HB3173 to allow gun safety courses in Illinois schools, QPS reacts
> 
> 
> House Bill 3173 is one step closer to getting passed and allowing schools to teach gun safety as part of their curriculum or as an after-school program. On April 22, House Bill 3173 passed the house with overwhelming support. 113 yays to 0 nays and on April 27, it had its first reading in the...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> khqa.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The problem with his logic is that he assumes that only the kids who hunt or have families who shoot will come across guns.  Those aren't the kids I worry about, but instead someone from an gun-free household comes across one and has no idea what to do or not do with it.
> 
> The NRA has a program called Eddie Eagle, but The Center for Handgun Violence is against their program simply because it is from the NRA.
> 
> This is defintely one of those times I wish MR had left PRSI as Read-Only.  There was a whole thread about this very topic.



It was a superintendent (not a principal) and he’s not a gun control activist - he is a retired Brigadier General with 34 years of service, a Legion of Merit, and a Bronze Star.

He also felt the legislation wasn’t necessary because he thinks families are doing a great job teaching the kids gun safety… and that the school board should make the choice, not the legislature… that is not the stance of a gun control activist.

You’re trying to force a false narrative, which is why you can’t find any valid examples of gun control groups opposing gun safety training. I know some of them oppose Eddie Eagle because, let’s face it, the NRA has gone so far to the right that people are scared of it. Who in their right mind opposes background checks to prevent criminals or the mentally ill from buying guns? The NRA, that’s who.


----------



## Herdfan

SuperMatt said:


> It was a superintendent (not a principal) and he’s not a gun control activist - he is a retired Brigadier General with 34 years of service, a Legion of Merit, and a Bronze Star.
> 
> He also felt the legislation wasn’t necessary because he thinks families are doing a great job teaching the kids gun safety… and that the school board should make the choice, not the legislature… that is not the stance of a gun control activist.
> 
> You’re trying to force a false narrative, which is why you can’t find any valid examples of gun control groups opposing gun safety training. I know some of them oppose Eddie Eagle because, let’s face it, the NRA has gone so far to the right that people are scared of it. Who in their right mind opposes background checks to prevent criminals or the mentally ill from buying guns? The NRA, that’s who.




My mistake on the principal vs superintendent.

But again, the kids who get safety training at home aren't the ones I worry about.  It is the ones that don't.

Not pushing any narrative.  It was an offhand comment that stemmed from where a few of us learned gun safety.


----------



## Yoused

Really, the safest way to handle a gun is to not handle a gun.


----------



## SuperMatt

Herdfan said:


> My mistake on the principal vs superintendent.
> 
> But again, the kids who get safety training at home aren't the ones I worry about.  It is the ones that don't.
> 
> Not pushing any narrative.  It was an offhand comment that stemmed from where a few of us learned gun safety.



I’m just trying to point out that “anti-gun” people are not opposed to gun safety training as you suggested. In fact, it seems to be one thing both “sides” of the debate tend to agree on.


----------



## DT

Fucking hell ...









						3 dead, 8 injured in shooting at Michigan high school, undersheriff says | CNN
					

Three people were killed and eight were injured in a shooting Tuesday at Oxford High School in Oxford, Michigan, authorities said.




					www.cnn.com
				












						3 killed,8 injured in shooting at Oxford High School in Michigan
					

The suspect, a 15-year-old sophomore, is in custody, the undersheriff said.




					www.nbcnews.com
				












						4 dead, 7 injured in Oxford High School shooting; suspect is 15-year-old student
					

A 15-year-old student has been taken into custody as a Michigan school shooting has left four dead and seven injured



					www.freep.com


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

SuperMatt said:


> Sure they would still be idiots, but nobody would be in the hospital with a gunshot wound. Kyle Rittenhouse is an idiot, and 2 people are dead because he had a gun.
> 
> Guns increase the suicide rate dramatically too.
> 
> I support the 2nd amendment too, when read in its entirety. Sadly, modern right-wing interpretation of it forgets about “well regulated” and wants no regulations on guns whatsoever.




I don't so much support it as I accept it, but I also think guns are more often used in situations that are far from their legal intended purpose and that's only going to get worse.  At best you are defending yourself with a gun against somebody else with a gun.  Imagine how much different the outcome would be if neither party had a gun.


----------



## User.45

DT said:


> Fucking hell ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3 dead, 8 injured in shooting at Michigan high school, undersheriff says | CNN
> 
> 
> Three people were killed and eight were injured in a shooting Tuesday at Oxford High School in Oxford, Michigan, authorities said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3 killed,8 injured in shooting at Oxford High School in Michigan
> 
> 
> The suspect, a 15-year-old sophomore, is in custody, the undersheriff said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nbcnews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4 dead, 7 injured in Oxford High School shooting; suspect is 15-year-old student
> 
> 
> A 15-year-old student has been taken into custody as a Michigan school shooting has left four dead and seven injured
> 
> 
> 
> www.freep.com



mussabeen self-defence....


----------



## User.45

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> I don't so much support it as I accept it, but I also think guns are more often used in situations that are far from their legal intended purpose and that's only going to get worse.  At best you are defending yourself with a gun against somebody else with a gun.  Imagine how much different the outcome would be if neither party had a gun.



I think 2A is obsolete. I want my shoulder (i.e. arm) launched weaponized drones, y'know to defend 'Murica from the Brits strictly.  Armed Drones To The People!


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

P_X said:


> I think 2A is obsolete. I want my shoulder (i.e. arm) launched weaponized drones, y'know to defend 'Murica from the Brits strictly.  Armed Drones To The People!




The only reason we haven't had full civilian armed drone battles is because the FAA has outlawed flying drones over like 90% of the country.  We'd easily get rid of most guns if we convinced the public they could also be used to take pictures of your daughter sunbathing in the back yard.


----------



## lizkat

P_X said:


> I think 2A is obsolete. I want my shoulder (i.e. arm) launched weaponized drones, y'know to defend 'Murica from the Brits strictly.  Armed Drones To The People!




Nah, we must have our 2A moments with regular ol' gear.  Remember Detective Bunk Moreland in _*The Wire*_, acknowledging that he dispatched a mouse with his service pistol after his wife complained about seeing the creature in her closet. 

"You killed a _mouse_ with a .38?"  his partner inquired. 

(Answer: "Well yeah, after I got one of her dress shoes.")

This time of year I could almost get into the idea of a tiny drone roaming my kitchen looking for those bastard mice.


----------



## Huntn

I just set up my new shrine…



*GF3T Tactical* (12guage)​


----------



## Huntn

It was not the teen’s fault…  Seriously the parents should be charged for reckless gun ownership and go to jail with him. 








						Fourth teen dies in Michigan high school shooting
					

Justin Shilling, a student at Oxford High School, died on the morning of December 1, 2021.




					nypost.com


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1466092201784446979/


----------



## SuperMatt

Huntn said:


> It was not the teen’s fault…  Seriously the parents should be charged for reckless gun ownership and go to jail with him.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fourth teen dies in Michigan high school shooting
> 
> 
> Justin Shilling, a student at Oxford High School, died on the morning of December 1, 2021.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com



Further details are coming to light. The parents are likely to be charged. The teachers and parents knew the kid was planning something… so why didn’t the parents make sure they knew where their newly-purchased semi-automatic handgun was?









						Suspect’s parents charged in Michigan school shooting
					

OXFORD TOWNSHIP, Mich. (AP) — A prosecutor filed involuntary manslaughter charges Friday against the parents of a 15-year-old accused of killing four students   and wounding seven other people at a Michigan High School.




					apnews.com
				




Also, one victim died while trying to disarm the killer. According to the way they ruled on Rittenhouse, will that murder be called self defense by the shooter?


----------



## Huntn

SuperMatt said:


> Further details are coming to light. The parents are likely to be charged. The teachers and parents knew the kid was planning something… so why didn’t the parents make sure they knew where their newly-purchased semi-automatic handgun was?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Suspect’s parents charged in Michigan school shooting
> 
> 
> OXFORD TOWNSHIP, Mich. (AP) — A prosecutor filed involuntary manslaughter charges Friday against the parents of a 15-year-old accused of killing four students   and wounding seven other people at a Michigan High School.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apnews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also, one victim died while trying to disarm the killer. According to the way they ruled on Rittenhouse, will that murder be called self defense by the shooter?



If we agree that bringing a weapon, pointing it at people is a provocation, then the people around you have a right to disarm you, especially after you have shot someone. Then you, gun owner are guilty.

This is the fundamental issue of carrying a firearm. There can’t be any assumption that how lethal force is wielded is justified by _how I felt_. Justification must be independently determined, and if you have a bunch of pro-gun people sitting  on the jury, this is what we’ll get.

_I fantasized about shooting shop lifters or looters, picked  up my gun and traveled to another community to live out my vigilante phantasy, but then I felt threatened, I feared for my life, and I justifiably murdered two people who objected to me pointing my gun at them. I’m gun blessed, my gun gave me the power, enabling me to kill people who objected to my actions of threatening them, what’s wrong with that?_

The foundation of the jury‘s innocent verdict was they were good with a white guy with a gun playing vigilante, while many of us would condemn this action. The people who were shot were not minorities, not looters and if they had guns, this would have been more complicated for the pro-gun jury because now they’d have to examine their prejudices about social unrest, not guns, because if both parties are armed they would be “gun equal”. Sadly in any instance like this involved  mixed ethnicity, the people of color would likely find themselves on the short end of the jury judgement.

My problem with this jury’s verdict is that the benefit of doubt was handed to the man with gun. This is incredibly dangerous, what used to be a fist fight, is now a killing. Therefore if this is the type jury you can expect, then in any gun altercation, if you want equality of judgement, you’d better have your own gun, or plan on being screwed by gun nuts on the jury, unless you are a minority, then you are in trouble regardless.


----------



## GermanSuplex

Just heard the parents (both) will be charged with four counts of involuntary manslaughter. Good.

But, because the perp was white and the parents are white, how much you want to bet the right will think the parents are victims? Lots of disturbing info released by the prosecutor too. The parents are psychos. But whenever a black teen commits a crime, you hear the right talk about parental responsibility. We'll see if they still feel that way. This was a disturbed kid with useless parents. No good news out of here.

Sounds like the school had plenty of warnings as well, and totally failed. This was a huge failure from top to bottom. We always talk about catching things early on, and looking for signs. Well, this kid pretty much was spelling everything out and look what happened. Things will get worse before they get better.


----------



## JayMysteri0

GermanSuplex said:


> Just heard the parents (both) will be charged with four counts of involuntary manslaughter. Good.
> 
> But, because the perp was white and the parents are white, how much you want to bet the right will think the parents are victims? Lots of disturbing info released by the prosecutor too. The parents are psychos. But whenever a black teen commits a crime, you hear the right talk about parental responsibility. We'll see if they still feel that way. This was a disturbed kid with useless parents. No good news out of here.
> 
> Sounds like the school had plenty of warnings as well, and totally failed. This was a huge failure from top to bottom. We always talk about catching things early on, and looking for signs. Well, this kid pretty much was spelling everything out and look what happened. Things will get worse before they get better.




I was thinking of all the times Black teen girls got body slammed by school police then suspended for any kind of acting up.  This kid...

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1466827397559373826/

With this kid though, perhaps charging the parents also will send a message of some sort that will be ignored by that crowd

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1466842749135634443/


----------



## Joe

They just look like irresponsible gun owners.


----------



## Eric

JagRunner said:


> They just look like irresponsible gun owners.



They look like just the sort of ignorant rednecks the NRA and Republicans cater to, what's the worst that can happen when you give guns to people like this with no questions asked? SMFH


----------



## SuperMatt

JayMysteri0 said:


> I was thinking of all the times Black teen girls got body slammed by school police then suspended for any kind of acting up.  This kid...
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1466827397559373826/
> 
> With this kid though, perhaps charging the parents also will send a message of some sort that will be ignored by that crowd
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1466842749135634443/



How the heck did the school officials believe sending him back to class was a good idea? Did they ask if the parents had a gun? Did they ask if they knew where the gun was?

WTF?!?!?!? This is bordering on criminal negligence by the school officials involved in the decision.


----------



## ronntaylor

Eric said:


> They look like just the sort of ignorant rednecks the NRA and Republicans cater to, what's the worst that can happen when you give guns to people like this with no questions asked? SMFH



The "father" is a class act. Didn't pay child support for his older children and wound up losing his job because of it. The "mother" is a real nutter. Posted a letter to Mango online where she stated that she was "sick of getting fucked in the ass and would rather be grabbed by the pussy."


----------



## Huntn

JayMysteri0 said:


> I was thinking of all the times Black teen girls got body slammed by school police then suspended for any kind of acting up.  This kid...
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1466827397559373826/
> 
> With this kid though, perhaps charging the parents also will send a message of some sort that will be ignored by that crowd
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1466842749135634443/



I heard they ran… (unconfirmed)


----------



## JayMysteri0

Huntn said:


> I heard they ran… (unconfirmed)



Actually in the instances I am referring to, it's because the girls didn't run, they got body slammed.

_If that is what you are referring to. _ ( unconfirmed )


----------



## Joe

Huntn said:


> I heard they ran… (unconfirmed)




Their lawyer said the parents weren't on the run. They left town for their safety but will be returning.


----------



## JayMysteri0

JagRunner said:


> Their lawyer said the parents weren't on the run. They left town for their safety but will be returning.



For THEIR safety? 

NOW they care about safety?


----------



## Yoused

To be fair some people in Britain _really_ like guns as well.


----------



## Huntn

Yoused said:


> To be fair some people in Britain _really_ like guns as well.



Hardly a valid comparison.


----------



## JayMysteri0

It's a never ending gov't sponsored cycle...

"Guns aren't the problem"

Kid kills other kids with gun in a school.

"Guns aren't the problem"

Kid kills other kids with gun in a school.

"Guns-"



> GOP blocks bill to expand gun background checks after Michigan school shooting
> 
> 
> Sen. Chuck Grassley (Iowa), the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, on Thursday blocked a request to proceed to legislation passed by the House in March to expand background check…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thehill.com




If there are two factors in a problem, you have to address one or both to honestly solve the problem.


----------



## Huntn

JayMysteri0 said:


> It's a never ending gov't sponsored cycle...
> 
> "Guns aren't the problem"
> 
> Kid kills other kids with gun in a school.
> 
> "Guns aren't the problem"
> 
> Kid kills other kids with gun in a school.
> 
> "Guns-"
> 
> 
> 
> If there are two factors in a problem, you have to address one or both to honestly solve the problem.



Say it with me,
_THOW SHALL NOT INTERFERE  WITH THE ABILITY OF A CITIZEN TO WORSHIP THEIR BRINGER OF DEATH IN THE NAME OF OUR HOLY FATHER, REAPING PERSONAL VENGEANCE UPON THOSE THEY PERCIEVED TO HAVE WRONGED THEM, ALONG WITH ANY OTHER COLLATERAL WHO PURPOSELY OR ACCIDENTALLY INTERFERES WITH THIS MOST HOLY OF TASKS_,  Amen mother fuckers.


----------



## lizkat

Wait for it...  a member of Congress (Kentucky, 3d district) posted this for his 2021 Christmas greeting.

Even for fans among his constituents,  the timing might not seem the best considering the school shooting deaths earlier this week.

I"m leaving aside all the GOP fake whines about non-conservatives in the USA trying to take the Christ out of Christmas


----------



## SuperMatt

lizkat said:


> Wait for it...  a member of Congress (Kentucky, 3d district) posted this for his 2021 Christmas greeting.
> 
> Even for fans among his constituents,  the timing might not seem the best considering the school shooting deaths earlier this week.
> 
> I"m leaving aside all the GOP fake whines about non-conservatives in the USA trying to take the Christ out of Christmas
> 
> 
> View attachment 10187



The thing is, considering how easy they’ve made it to get guns, having them is nothing worth bragging about.


----------



## JayMysteri0

lizkat said:


> Wait for it...  a member of Congress (Kentucky, 3d district) posted this for his 2021 Christmas greeting.
> 
> Even for fans among his constituents,  the timing might not seem the best considering the school shooting deaths earlier this week.
> 
> I"m leaving aside all the GOP fake whines about non-conservatives in the USA trying to take the Christ out of Christmas
> 
> 
> View attachment 10187



That is just straight fetishization.  Him with Rambo's LMG and her with a 'Tommy' ( Thompson ) gun.

Seriously though, you're Santa... You really going to slide down the chimney & illegally break in... to *leave *ammo to a bunch of eager gun nuts?!

F' NO!  I'm telling them I mailed their shit, and USPS under Dejoy _promises_  it will be there by Christmas...

Of next year.


----------



## Joe

They do it to annoy y’all. And it works every time.


----------



## SuperMatt

JagRunner said:


> They do it to annoy y’all. And it works every time.



They should be so proud of themselves. Their supreme accomplishment in life was “owning the Libz.”


----------



## User.45

JagRunner said:


> They do it to annoy y’all. And it works every time.



#trollservativism



SuperMatt said:


> They should be so proud of themselves. Their supreme accomplishment in life was “owning the Libz.”



Massey impressed me as someone with asperger's, also some of his arguments about CO2 being good for plants is as fair as saying that the pandemic is good for billionaires.


----------



## JayMysteri0

JagRunner said:


> They do it to annoy y’all. And it works every time.



If someone's goal in life is to get an 'eyeroll'   out of me, they need loftier goals in life.


----------



## User.45

JayMysteri0 said:


> If someone's goal in life is to get an 'eyeroll'   out of me, they need loftier goals in life.



This guy went to MIT. These guys just think their constituents are this dumb, and well...


----------



## Joe

JayMysteri0 said:


> If someone's goal in life is to get an 'eyeroll'   out of me, they need loftier goals in life.




Y'all sound surprised. They're literally dying to own the libs (r/HermanCainAward)


----------



## JayMysteri0

JagRunner said:


> Y'all sound surprised. They're literally dying to own the libs (r/HermanCainAward)



Surprised?  No.  Disappointed they can't find anything better to do with their time as elected officials?  Yes.


----------



## lizkat

JagRunner said:


> They do it to annoy y’all. And it works every time.




Yeah I think my new tack is going to be every time I see some GOP free-air-time media ploy from these showboaters in Congress, is to scroll on past it --and to un follow whoever tweeted it into my timeline)-- and then donate $5 to any non-GOP candidate challenging him or her for 2022.  

Why even help the thing go more viral by referencing it anywhere on the net anyway....  it's what they're looking for, you're reight.


----------



## JayMysteri0

lizkat said:


> Yeah I think my new tack is going to be every time I see some GOP free-air-time media ploy from these showboaters in Congress, is to scroll on past it --and to un follow whoever tweeted it into my timeline)-- and then donate $5 to any non-GOP candidate challenging him or her for 2022.
> 
> Why even help the thing go more viral by referencing it anywhere on the net anyway....  it's what they're looking for, you're reight.



I've always wondered about the logic & phrase of "it appeals to their base".  Which is what a lot of these antics really are.

Why?

It's been joked that an anvil painted with a red letter 'r' on it, could have won Boebert's seat in office if not her.  That's the intended power of gerrymandering. The base would vote for literal Saran wrapped shit out party loyalty, and not what the shit's policies are.  It's like continually appealing to your dog, compared to the neighbor you've convinced your dog will beat them every chance they get.

What is all of this "appealing" really accomplishing?  It's just the new version of what those same people being appealed to bitch about before.  It's politicians worried about appealing / getting re elected, over doing their job.


----------



## User.45

lizkat said:


> Yeah I think my new tack is going to be every time I see some GOP free-air-time media ploy from these showboaters in Congress, is to scroll on past it --and to un follow whoever tweeted it into my timeline)-- and then donate $5 to any non-GOP candidate challenging him or her for 2022.
> 
> Why even help the thing go more viral by referencing it anywhere on the net anyway....  it's what they're looking for, you're reight.





JayMysteri0 said:


> I've always wondered about the logic & phrase of "it appeals to their base".  Which is what a lot of these antics really are.
> 
> Why?
> 
> It's been joked that an anvil painted with a red letter 'r' on it, could have won Boebert's seat in office if not her.  That's the intended power of gerrymandering. The base would vote for literal Saran wrapped shit out party loyalty, and not what the shit's policies are.  It's like continually appealing to your dog, compared to the neighbor you've convinced your dog will beat them every chance they get.
> 
> What is all of this "appealing" really accomplishing?  It's just the new version of what those same people being appealed to bitch about before.  It's politicians worried about appealing / getting re elected, over doing their job.



This is old guys figuring out social media without actually having to understand the nuance of it. 
If debate and outrage wouldn't be overprioritized by the engines, these asses would have to work a little harder for attention.


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1467259656615522305/https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1467199148646670337/


----------



## User.45

All the back to school essentials from
      Unexpected

apt


----------



## Thomas Veil

lizkat said:


> Wait for it...  a member of Congress (Kentucky, 3d district) posted this for his 2021 Christmas greeting....
> 
> 
> View attachment 10187



I saw that earlier. Sickening. Even without the context of a recent mass shooting.



JayMysteri0 said:


> That is just straight fetishization.



Yes. Exactly.

Or as someone else put it...


----------



## Huntn

Huntn said:


> I heard they ran… (unconfirmed)



They were found by police hiding in a warehouse. These people who want guns without restrictions, I think many of them want guns without accountability too. 









						Parents of Michigan school shooter found hiding
					

Police say James and Jennifer Crumbley, the parents of a teen accused of killing four students in a Michigan school shooting, were taken into custody in Detroit overnight.




					www.fox13now.com


----------



## SuperMatt

JayMysteri0 said:


> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1467259656615522305/https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1467199148646670337/



They discussed this on Meet the Press too. The panelists generally agreed that it was trolling, although Errin Haines pointed out over 60,000 people “liked” the tweet. You have to be a truly disgusting human being to troll people right after kids were murdered in a school shooting. But that’s today’s GOP in a nutshell. Trump won by being the biggest asshole, so every other wannabe GOP politician is following the same playbook.


----------



## User.45

Huntn said:


> They were found by police hiding in a warehouse. These people who want guns without restrictions, I think many of them want guns without accountability too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Parents of Michigan school shooter found hiding
> 
> 
> Police say James and Jennifer Crumbley, the parents of a teen accused of killing four students in a Michigan school shooting, were taken into custody in Detroit overnight.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.fox13now.com



Parents held accountable for their kids shooting up places is a step in the direction I'm advocating for: 
People can stick to their guns, but if somebody else gets killed or injured by their gun, then they shall stick to the principle of responsibility too.


----------



## JayMysteri0

P_X said:


> Parents held accountable for their kids shooting up places is a step in the direction I'm advocating for:
> People can stick to their guns, but if somebody else gets killed or injured by their gun, then they shall stick to the principle of responsibility too.



For reference, let's remember what their attorney said earlier...



> Parents of accused Oxford shooter are headed back to area for arraignment, say attorneys
> 
> 
> UPDATE (4:15 p.m.): The parents of teen shooting suspect Ethan Crumbley are returning to the area for their arraignment according to attorneys Shannon Smith and Mariell Lehman.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.fox2detroit.com


----------



## JayMysteri0

Responsible gun owner defends himself from speeding car...

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1467924699011338248/

NOT!

Not in America, guy angry gets gun, shoots someone.

Story as usual.



> Arrest made after man shot dead behind wheel of SUV in Pottstown, authorities say
> 
> 
> Police say Gerald Scott Ramos, 43, fatally shot Darrius Waller, 36, as he sat behind the wheel of an SUV. The shooting is said to have stemmed from a 'supposed speeding incident.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.fox29.com


----------



## SuperMatt

JayMysteri0 said:


> Responsible gun owner defends himself from speeding car...
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1467924699011338248/
> 
> NOT!
> 
> Not in America, guy angry gets gun, shoots someone.
> 
> Story as usual.



This reminds me the story of the woman who was chased home by a group of men on motorcycles and pulled her own gun to scare them off, only to find that the road-rager biker was also carrying a concealed weapon. The reason for them chasing her home? A minor traffic collision that didn’t injure anybody, or even disable the motorcycle.

In both cases, road-ragers killed somebody because they had guns. This is happening more and more frequently. It’s bad enough when somebody gets road rage and drives dangerously to express it... but add guns into the mix, and it’s like Mad Max out there.


----------



## Herdfan

SuperMatt said:


> This reminds me the story of the woman who was chased home by a group of men on motorcycles and pulled her own gun to scare them off, only to find that the road-rager biker was also carrying a concealed weapon. The reason for them chasing her home? A minor traffic collision that didn’t injure anybody, or even disable the motorcycle.




Your version of this is far different from most reporting.


----------



## User.45

JayMysteri0 said:


> Responsible gun owner defends himself from speeding car...
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1467924699011338248/
> 
> NOT!
> 
> Not in America, guy angry gets gun, shoots someone.
> 
> Story as usual.



@DT I hope you're OK. 



SuperMatt said:


> This reminds me the story of the woman who was chased home by a group of men on motorcycles and pulled her own gun to scare them off, only to find that the road-rager biker was also carrying a concealed weapon. The reason for them chasing her home? A minor traffic collision that didn’t injure anybody, or even disable the motorcycle.
> 
> In both cases, road-ragers killed somebody because they had guns. This is happening more and more frequently. It’s bad enough when somebody gets road rage and drives dangerously to express it... but add guns into the mix, and it’s like Mad Max out there.



These people need diapers, not guns.


----------



## SuperMatt

Herdfan said:


> Your version of this is far different from most reporting.



I don’t think I got any details wrong.

Most reporting put quite a spin on things, in favor of the killer. 

1. How do we know the woman intentionally hit the man on the motorcycle? They are claiming that without backing it up.

2. Was the killer under immediate threat just because the woman had a gun? 

All accounts were from witnesses who literally followed the woman home along with the killer, so presumably these witnesses are friends of the killer. That means I have to read between the lines on what’s being said to try and get to a more honest account.

To me, somebody followed home by multiple men on bikes would feel threatened enough to get a gun and tell them to leave, which accounts confirm she did.


----------



## Joe

SuperMatt said:


> This reminds me the story of the woman who was chased home by a group of men on motorcycles and pulled her own gun to scare them off, only to find that the road-rager biker was also carrying a concealed weapon. The reason for them chasing her home? A minor traffic collision that didn’t injure anybody, or even disable the motorcycle.
> 
> In both cases, road-ragers killed somebody because they had guns. This is happening more and more frequently. It’s bad enough when somebody gets road rage and drives dangerously to express it... but add guns into the mix, and it’s like Mad Max out there.




You keep trying to make this woman the victim. She caused her own death by simply not staying in her home until the police came. You have a bias towards this group of bikers because they're bikers. They didn't break the law. They weren't banging on her door when she came out with a gun. They were on the public street waiting for the police to show up. SHE'S the one that made a bad decision and came out with a gun pointed at them. It cost her her life. #ThoughtsAndPrayers


----------



## Joe

JayMysteri0 said:


> Responsible gun owner defends himself from speeding car...
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1467924699011338248/
> 
> NOT!
> 
> Not in America, guy angry gets gun, shoots someone.
> 
> Story as usual.




He's charged with murder, as he should be. Good riddance.


----------



## Joe

SuperMatt said:


> I don’t think I got any details wrong.
> 
> Most reporting put quite a spin on things, in favor of the killer.
> 
> 1. How do we know the woman intentionally hit the man on the motorcycle? They are claiming that without backing it up.
> 
> 2. Was the killer under immediate threat just because the woman had a gun?
> 
> All accounts were from witnesses who literally followed the woman home along with the killer, so presumably these witnesses are friends of the killer. That means I have to read between the lines on what’s being said to try and get to a more honest account.
> 
> To me, somebody followed home by multiple men on bikes would feel threatened enough to get a gun and tell them to leave, which accounts confirm she did.




All that could have been avoided if she had just stayed inside until the police came.


----------



## User.45

JagRunner said:


> All that could have been avoided if she had just stayed inside until the police came.



Sorry but @SuperMatt's narrative is just as correct as yours... Neither of us have enough information to further debate this. 
She is the _victim_ by definition. Period. Full stop. The killer can have his victim privileges next time he gets homicided.


----------



## SuperMatt

JagRunner said:


> You keep trying to make this woman the victim. She caused her own death by simply not staying in her home until the police came. You have a bias towards this group of bikers because they're bikers. They didn't break the law. They weren't banging on her door when she came out with a gun. They were on the public street waiting for the police to show up. SHE'S the one that made a bad decision and came out with a gun pointed at them. It cost her her life. #ThoughtsAndPrayers



She is a victim of a shooting. I disagree with your opinion (which you present as fact for some reason). Wielding a weapon doesn’t make it open season for others to gun you down.

She had no way of knowing the biker had a gun. From the accounts, he didn’t warn her before opening fire. And also, it doesn’t seem like anybody’s life was in danger until he did so. She was telling them that they were threatening her and she told them to leave. She didn’t fire a warning shot.

You say SHE should have called the police. If one looks at the law for collisions like this, it is the *bikers* who should have noted her license plate and called the police. Following her home was unnecessary.

Remember, the witnesses in the case are NOT impartial observers. No impartial observer would follow a woman home after a fender bender. These were the killer’s friends. So their accounts are to be taken with many grains of salt.

People DEFINITIVELY stating that she is to blame are full of it. We don’t know all the facts, and I am VERY skeptical of witness reports from friends of the killer.


----------



## Joe

P_X said:


> Sorry but @SuperMatt's narrative is just as correct as yours... Neither of us have enough information to further debate this.
> She is the _victim_ by definition. Period. Full stop. The killer can have his victim privileges next time he gets homicided.




Is he being charged with a crime?


----------



## SuperMatt

JagRunner said:


> Is he being charged with a crime?



Investigation is ongoing. Did you listen to HER 911 call? She was telling them to leave her alone and then you hear many gunshots from Derr.

Did you see the video of where her house is? Not exactly on a busy street, and fairly lengthy driveway. Not like they needed to hang around either. It would be real easy to note the address, call the cops, and go home.









						Police release 911 calls from shooting of Volusia library assistant after hit-and-run crash
					

Orange City police are investigating after a Volusia County library assistant was shot and killed during a road rage incident, police said.




					www.wftv.com
				




You weren’t there, but you are willing to say “she’s at fault, #thoughtsandprayers” which is an asshole thing to do for anybody that died, much less a pregnant woman.

Perhaps the killer will be able to claim self defense in court (if he’s charged). But being completely heartless towards the deceased pregnant woman is disgusting IMHO.


----------



## User.45

JagRunner said:


> Is he being charged with a crime?



Is the investigation over? No. I stated the only facts in terms of who is the victim, who is the killer and that it was a homicide. 

If you're into snuff porn, here it is... She yells at them telling "You are three men. You followed me home. Leave me alone!" Gets 8 bullets within 2.5 sec from the first word. Derr's gotta have some drawing skills, unless he was fixin to pull that trigger already...


----------



## Yoused

SuperMatt said:


> But being completely heartless towards the deceased pregnant woman is disgusting IMHO.



I spent a lot of years using a bicycle as my transportation. Car drivers are serious assholes. I realize that a motorcycle is very different from a bicycle, but in terms of being vulnerable on the road, there are a lot of similarities. I also realize that a lot of motorcyclists are assholes as well. But the main thing about operating a vehicle is, that thing in front of you, fail to hit it. That is your job, and if that thing in front of you is smaller than you, really do not hit it.

But there is a big gap in this story. What was it happened that caused them to follow her home? Lacking unbiased info, it is hard to guess. TBMK, even gang bikers are not in the habit of picking out a random stranger for harassment. Something happened, and if you know what it is like to (even seem to) have cheated death, you know that emotions can run high in the moment.

Which does not excuse the guy from shooting her. She should not be dead today, even if she scared the shit outta the biker. Yet, it still bothers me, the callous disregard with which so many people operate their vehicles.


----------



## User.45

JagRunner said:


> All that could have been avoided if she had just stayed inside until the police came.



Or we’d know her narrative if she pulled the trigger immediately. She could have said she feared for her own and her fetus' life. Stand your ground states are medieval.


----------



## Herdfan

SuperMatt said:


> She is a victim of a shooting. I disagree with your opinion (which you present as fact for some reason). Wielding a weapon doesn’t make it open season for others to gun you down.
> 
> You say SHE should have called the police. If one looks at the law for collisions like this, it is the *bikers* who should have noted her license plate and called the police. Following her home was unnecessary.




Simply wielding, perhaps not.  But the minute she raised it in their direction she was an imminent threat.  Rule 2 of gun ownership (Rule 1 is always treat a weapon as loaded) is don't point it at anything you don't intend to shoot.  So they had no idea if she would fire it or was simply trying to scare them off. 

From several reports, she was also on the phone with 911 when she came out of the house with the gun.  I understand she may have been scared, but given they weren't banging on her door or threatening her, she needed to stay inside her house.

We taught our daughter that if she ever thinks she is being followed, do not go home and instead call 911 and have them direct her to the nearest police station.


----------



## SuperMatt

Herdfan said:


> Simply wielding, perhaps not.  But the minute she raised it in their direction she was an imminent threat.  Rule 2 of gun ownership (Rule 1 is always treat a weapon as loaded) is don't point it at anything you don't intend to shoot.  So they had no idea if she would fire it or was simply trying to scare them off.
> 
> From several reports, she was also on the phone with 911 when she came out of the house with the gun.  I understand she may have been scared, but given they weren't banging on her door or threatening her, she needed to stay inside her house.
> 
> We taught our daughter that if she ever thinks she is being followed, do not go home and instead call 911 and have them direct her to the nearest police station.



You don’t know if she raised it in their direction. It’s the word of the killer and his friends against a corpse. The dead tell no tales. I saw the video from the body cam. This wasn’t a “public street” as reports make it sound. It’s a dirt road, maybe part of her driveway? It looks like she was on her own property when she was shot.

I think it’s pretty insane to claim ‘self defense’ when you follow a person home and shoot them on their own lawn when they’re telling you to leave their property,


----------



## SuperMatt

Yoused said:


> I spent a lot of years using a bicycle as my transportation. Car drivers are serious assholes. I realize that a motorcycle is very different from a bicycle, but in terms of being vulnerable on the road, there are a lot of similarities. I also realize that a lot of motorcyclists are assholes as well. But the main thing about operating a vehicle is, that thing in front of you, fail to hit it. That is your job, and if that thing in front of you is smaller than you, really do not hit it.
> 
> But there is a big gap in this story. What was it happened that caused them to follow her home? Lacking unbiased info, it is hard to guess. TBMK, even gang bikers are not in the habit of picking out a random stranger for harassment. Something happened, and if you know what it is like to (even seem to) have cheated death, you know that emotions can run high in the moment.
> 
> Which does not excuse the guy from shooting her. She should not be dead today, even if she scared the shit outta the biker. Yet, it still bothers me, the callous disregard with which so many people operate their vehicles.



There is zero reason to follow somebody home after an accident in which nobody was injured. Get the license plate and call the cops. Done. Following the person home is vigilantism and probably stalking too.

Sure you would be angry if you were on a bike and got hit… all the more reason to NOT follow the person - your anger might cause you to do something stupid like murder another human being.


----------



## SuperMatt

P_X said:


> Or we’d know her narrative if she pulled the trigger immediately. She could have said she feared for her own and her fetus' life. Stand your ground states are medieval.



Agreed. So many stupid things done by both parties here. But take guns out of the equation… and everybody would still be alive.


----------



## SuperMatt

One thing I learned from the earlier 911 call made by the men: they knew her license plate number before they started to follow her. That should have been the end of it right there.


----------



## Herdfan

SuperMatt said:


> I saw the video from the body cam. This wasn’t a “public street” as reports make it sound. It’s a dirt road, maybe part of her driveway? It looks like she was on her own property when she was shot.




It was most certainly a public street.  The 1000 block of E Wisconsin Ave is as you noted a dirt road.  Contrary to what you may believe, there are unimproved streets and roads in this country and people do live on them.  

She probably was on her property when she was shot, but being on your own property doesn't remove self defense from someone else if you are pointing a gun at them.









						1000 E Wisconsin Ave · 1000 E Wisconsin Ave, Orange City, FL 32763
					

1000 E Wisconsin Ave, Orange City, FL 32763




					www.google.com


----------



## SuperMatt

Herdfan said:


> It was most certainly a public street.  The 1000 block of E Wisconsin Ave is as you noted a dirt road.  Contrary to what you may believe, there are unimproved streets and roads in this country and people do live on them.
> 
> She probably was on her property when she was shot, but being on your own property doesn't remove self defense from someone else if you are pointing a gun at them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1000 E Wisconsin Ave · 1000 E Wisconsin Ave, Orange City, FL 32763
> 
> 
> 1000 E Wisconsin Ave, Orange City, FL 32763
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com



On the bodycam video, it looks like he is lying on a driveway, not on the street nearby. His bike is parked on somebody’s lawn - maybe hers? But either way, if a gang of armed bikers comes to your house and threatens you, and you pull a gun to defend yourself, I guess you’d be ok with dying and them going home scot-free if they draw their guns faster than you.

And again, what evidence is there that she pointed the gun at them? They don’t even use that language in their own 911 call, just saying that she “pulled a gun” - not pointed at them.

It will be his word, supported by his friends, against a person robbed of life who cannot testify. And with the terrible self-defense laws in Florida, you can basically shoot whoever you want, and then claim self-defense… because you just need to “feel” threatened in order to kill another human being legally.

Whatever happened to the “castle doctrine” that is often cited by gun rights advocates?


----------



## Herdfan

SuperMatt said:


> On the bodycam video, it looks like he is lying on a driveway, not on the street nearby. His bike is parked on somebody’s lawn - maybe hers? But either way, if a gang of armed bikers comes to your house and threatens you, and you pull a gun to defend yourself, I guess you’d be ok with dying and them going home scot-free if they draw their guns faster than you.
> 
> And again, what evidence is there that she pointed the gun at them? They don’t even use that language in their own 911 call, just saying that she “pulled a gun” - not pointed at them.
> 
> It will be his word, supported by his friends, against a person robbed of life who cannot testify. And with the terrible self-defense laws in Florida, you can basically shoot whoever you want, and then claim self-defense… because you just need to “feel” threatened in order to kill another human being legally.
> 
> Whatever happened to the “castle doctrine” that is often cited by gun rights advocates?




Two points.

She didn't know they were armed until she pulled her own weapon.  

Second, had she shot them, Castle Doctrine would have protected her.


----------



## SuperMatt

Herdfan said:


> Two points.
> 
> She didn't know they were armed until she pulled her own weapon.
> 
> Second, had she shot them, Castle Doctrine would have protected her.



Thanks.

This confirms what @P_X has been saying. The laws are setup so that whoever shoots first, wins. Everybody can claim self-defense now.

This is an untenable system. What’s the difference between this and anarchy?

In America are we moving towards making abortion a felony while making murder of a non-fetus perfectly legal.


----------



## SuperMatt

lizkat said:


> Wait for it...  a member of Congress (Kentucky, 3d district) posted this for his 2021 Christmas greeting.
> 
> Even for fans among his constituents,  the timing might not seem the best considering the school shooting deaths earlier this week.
> 
> I"m leaving aside all the GOP fake whines about non-conservatives in the USA trying to take the Christ out of Christmas
> 
> 
> View attachment 10187



Lauren Boebert is a copycat:

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1468412072547520516/


----------



## hulugu

SuperMatt said:


> You don’t know if she raised it in their direction. It’s the word of the killer and his friends against a corpse. The dead tell no tales. I saw the video from the body cam. This wasn’t a “public street” as reports make it sound. It’s a dirt road, maybe part of her driveway? It looks like she was on her own property when she was shot.
> 
> I think it’s pretty insane to claim ‘self defense’ when you follow a person home and shoot them on their own lawn when they’re telling you to leave their property,




Years ago, I read an analysis of crime statistics that noted the difference between the victim and the perpetrator in a homicide was often reaction time. This was based on statistics of bar fights and knives, and quite simply, the person who died hesitated slightly in their attack, while the other person was just a little quicker to violence.

Essentially, with a high prevalence of firearms and a prevalence of easy rules to use them, we've created a society where people are going to get shot because whomever "shoots first, wins." 

She could have fired her weapon from cover, killed all three men, and that would have been self-defense. And, if everyone has an argument for self-defense, then the entire moral argument has collapsed.

They're all in the wrong, but as you noted, it's insane to claim 'self-defense' when you go out of your way to create a situation, and then when that situation turns violent, you react.


----------



## Joe

P_X said:


> Or we’d know her narrative if she pulled the trigger immediately. She could have said she feared for her own and her fetus' life. Stand your ground states are medieval.




She played a stupid game, she won a stupid prize.


----------



## Joe

SuperMatt said:


> Lauren Boebert is a copycat:
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1468412072547520516/




Congrats. She got the reaction from the left that she wanted.


----------



## hulugu

JagRunner said:


> Congrats. She got the reaction from the left that she wanted.




Yep. 

I will never forget that Madison Cawthorne said that he'd "built [his] staff around comms rather than legislation." 

Essentially, the whole block of new Congress critters from the right are an effort to control and fight over messaging, and stunts like these are just attempts at attention. 

Of course the lady who made sure we could see her guns in a Zoom has a shitload of guns, and will make her kids carry these guns in the Christmas card the minute that another Republican does. They're all gun-humping dorks. 

What I think is more dangerous is her prejudice against Muslims, and her obvious lying about her interactions with Rep. Omar.  

But, eventually, Rep. Palin-but-somehow-dumber will fall out of favor, if we focus on her lying and her prejudices rather than her guns. We know she has guns. And, the left needs to treat this as something embarrassing and small, rather than important. 

Now, that's not to say that their whole armed Christian Nationalism isn't dangerous as hell, and this goes back to my long-held theory that a whole lot of gun owners are just going to be brown shirts for fascism, rather than some bulwark for freedom. They say they're there to fight for freedom, but so did the Chinese Communist party when it took over Tibet. 

Christian Nationalism will undermine every amendment to the U.S. Constitution, break down every wall between religion and government, and expand its own ideals to every bit of the culture that it can. And, it will do so violently if it can get away with it.


----------



## Eric

JagRunner said:


> Congrats. She got the reaction from the left that she wanted.



Yep, she's just trolling in the worst sort of way but I decided to respond, it's a perfect opportunity to remember shooting victims as well.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1468643743590797313/


----------



## SuperMatt

Perhaps because of the Rittenhouse verdict, we now have Jan 6 rioters trying to claim self-defense in *their* trials.

We have a *serious* problem with the self-defense laws in this country.









						Some Jan. 6 Rioters May Use Police Brutality as a Defense (Published 2021)
					

Half a dozen defendants in the assault on the Capitol are using video to try to make a case that they were simply protecting themselves and others. They face skepticism and an uphill legal battle.




					www.nytimes.com
				



(paywall removed)



> At this point, about a half-dozen Jan. 6 defendants have signaled that they intend to mount a case that is based on self-defense or on the defense of others.
> 
> On Thursday, for example, a lawyer for Thomas Webster, a former New York City police officer charged with assault, indicated that he was inclined to pursue a self-defense case and argue that officers at the Capitol struck first. That same day, prosecutors filed papers in the case of Robert Gieswein, a militia member from Colorado, asking a judge to bar all self-defense claims at a trial set for February, suggesting that they believed Mr. Gieswein might raise them.





> The first person to have said he would pursue a self-defense case was Edward Jacob Lang, a self-described social media influencer from New York. He has been charged with seven counts of assaulting officers, some with a riot shield and others with a baseball bat.


----------



## JayMysteri0

SuperMatt said:


> Perhaps because of the Rittenhouse verdict, we now have Jan 6 rioters trying to claim self-defense in *their* trials.
> 
> We have a *serious* problem with the self-defense laws in this country.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some Jan. 6 Rioters May Use Police Brutality as a Defense (Published 2021)
> 
> 
> Half a dozen defendants in the assault on the Capitol are using video to try to make a case that they were simply protecting themselves and others. They face skepticism and an uphill legal battle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (paywall removed)



There's some classic disingenuous hypocrisy / irony.  The crowd that cheered on when the police heavy handedly weighed into BLM protests, wants to whine about police being mean to them.   Fuck these people.  Not one of them got their head bopped into the side of a car, like their cherished leader wanted police to do.


----------



## JayMysteri0

So let me get this straight, having kids wear basically body armor in school ( let the fucking concept sink, 1st world problems y'all ) is okay, but wearing a mask is going to far?!



https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1468617037668884482/

When shooters realize ( since they will also be the kids assigned body armor ) realize they need armor piercing rounds, what's the solution then?  Still not anything about guns?  Really?

But masks...


----------



## ronntaylor

JayMysteri0 said:


> So let me get this straight, having kids wear basically body armor in school ( let the fucking concept sink, 1st world problems y'all ) is okay, but wearing a mask is going to far?!
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1468617037668884482/
> 
> When shooters realize ( since they will also be the kids assigned body armor ) realize they need armor piercing rounds, what's the solution then?  Still not anything about guns?  Really?
> 
> But masks...



They'll next need steel-plated hats or maybe new age helmets that cover the top of the torso. Hell, maybe steel suits are coming soon-ish


----------



## JayMysteri0

Want to return the favor to gun fetish Christmas card brigade?

Here's a suggestion

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1468589400879767565/


----------



## User.45

hulugu said:


> Years ago, I read an analysis of crime statistics that noted the difference between the victim and the perpetrator in a homicide was often reaction time. This was based on statistics of bar fights and knives, and quite simply, the person who died hesitated slightly in their attack, while the other person was just a little quicker to violence.
> 
> Essentially, with a high prevalence of firearms and a prevalence of easy rules to use them, we've created a society where people are going to get shot because whomever "shoots first, wins."
> 
> She could have fired her weapon from cover, killed all three men, and that would have been self-defense. And, if everyone has an argument for self-defense, then the entire moral argument has collapsed.
> 
> They're all in the wrong, but as you noted, it's insane to claim 'self-defense' when you go out of your way to create a situation, and then when that situation turns violent, you react.



And this awakens the neuroscientist in me. People with antisocial personality disorder have their brains wired really differently. They won’t have the hesitation most average empathetic person has. I have a friend like this, I call him a humanistic sociopath, he’s very impulsive has a very quick wit and he never hesitates making split-second decisions. For him empathy comes in a secondary layer which he actually had to learn And takes extra effort.

If society starts encouraging and rewarding people to be the quicker in violence, antisocial people will have a field day…and well, they call it antisocial for a reason.


----------



## Herdfan

P_X said:


> For him empathy comes in a secondary layer which he actually had to learn And takes extra effort.




But is this simply a learned behavior, or can he actually feel it?


----------



## User.45

JagRunner said:


> She played a stupid game, she won a stupid prize.



Since the investigation is still open, you opinion is just prejudice. Also, i see you want to beat @jkcerda at using this phrase the most on this forum.



SuperMatt said:


> Perhaps because of the Rittenhouse verdict, we now have Jan 6 rioters trying to claim self-defense in *their* trials.
> 
> We have a *serious* problem with the self-defense laws in this country.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some Jan. 6 Rioters May Use Police Brutality as a Defense (Published 2021)
> 
> 
> Half a dozen defendants in the assault on the Capitol are using video to try to make a case that they were simply protecting themselves and others. They face skepticism and an uphill legal battle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (paywall removed)




This is going to be 



Spoiler: Vulgar



the mental image that would symbolize this is White Privilege smoking meth then start contorting itself to go to town on itself while uttering homophobic slurs


----------



## lizkat

ronntaylor said:


> They'll next need steel-plated hats or maybe new age helmets that cover the top of the torso. Hell, maybe steel suits are coming soon-ish




All because we supposedly need arms borne in the care of a well-regulated militia to protect the body politic.

Seemed to me --and not least right around the time the Sandy Hook school shooting occurred--  that as a nation we had already fallen way short of "well regulated" arms-bearing, never mind how militia might fit into our modern 2A picture.   tbh it might seem like there's more self-regulation than formal legal constraints on straw purchasers runnin' and gunnin' their hauls from states with lax laws to states with stricter ones...  i mean they keep getting away with it because the buy-sides of the original transactions ARE STILL --absurdly-- ENTIRELY LEGAL.

The icing on the cake of my concern was when Congress couldn't get it together to do a f'g thing in the wake of that Sandy Hook slaughter.    Talk about days of infamy.

No lobby for any industry should be allowed to buy such political power.  Yet there we were, and here we still are because the NRA are still doing it, even in the face of myriad investigations of their finances, charges of abuse of their charitable foundation, tax evasion charges, judges tossing out their bankruptcy pleas as fraudulent attempts to evade regulation, and etc.

In January 2021 the NRA even mailed their usual over the top warnings about "armed government agents storming your house, taking your guns, and hauling you off to prison"  -- and to top that off,  in an appeal for donations,  bragged that “*only the NRA has the strength to win knock-down brawls on Capitol Hill.*”

I don't have a problem with civilians owning guns for self defense or hunting.  Those gun owners don't need AR-15 style weapons or high capacity ammo-feed either.  I have a problem with lax enforcement and with some law enforcement officers deciding which "gun control" laws they'll bother to observe or enforce.

It's time for voters to challenge the braggart NRA by making it clear to elected officials at state and federal levels that accepting donations from the gun lobby in exchange for lax regulation of weaponry and ammunition options is well beyond the pale.  And time to quit winking at gun acquisition and ownership law loopholes that one could still fly a cargo plane though.  The cost to innocent life of a failure to regulate properly has always been too high, and the cost of reasonable regulation to honest hunters and home or self defenders all too often (and luridly) exaggerated.


----------



## Yoused

lizkat said:


> Seemed to me --and not least right around the time the Sandy Hook school shooting occurred-- that as a nation we had already fallen way short of "well regulated" arms-bearing, never mind how militia might fit into our modern 2A picture. tbh it might seem like there's more self-regulation than formal legal constraints



You understand that that is not what "well regulated" means, right? In the original language, in which it has to be interpreted, a well regulated militia was one that functioned well, in the way that they would say that a well regulated clock kept good time.

Which should mean that gun ownership could come with licensing, the same way that motor vehicles do. But the gundamentalists oppose even that.


----------



## SuperMatt

Yoused said:


> You understand that that is not what "well regulated" means, right? In the original language, in which it has to be interpreted, a well regulated militia was one that functioned well, in the way that they would say that a well regulated clock kept good time.
> 
> Which should mean that gun ownership could come with licensing, the same way that motor vehicles do. But the gundamentalists oppose even that.



In the original language, the “arms” one could bear included swords and muskets… not ar-15s.


----------



## User.45

Yoused said:


> You understand that that is not what "well regulated" means, right? In the original language, in which it has to be interpreted, a well regulated militia was one that functioned well, in the way that they would say that a well regulated clock kept good time.
> 
> Which should mean that gun ownership could come with licensing, the same way that motor vehicles do. But the gundamentalists oppose even that.





SuperMatt said:


> In the original language, the “arms” one could bear included swords and muskets… not ar-15s.



I'm sure the Founding Fathers would be proud of metal detectors and school body armors..


----------



## DT

Yoused said:


> You understand that that is not what "well regulated" means, right? In the original language, in which it has to be interpreted, a well regulated militia was one that functioned well, in the way that they would say that a well regulated clock kept good time.
> 
> Which should mean that gun ownership could come with licensing, the same way that motor vehicles do. But the gundamentalists oppose even that.




It goes even further than that, the concept of a militia has a service element and organizational structures overseen by an elected governing body.  Militia doesn't mean a couple of fucknuts go out and buy guns and they're now a militia, it's more akin to being in the National Guard and keeping your equipment at home (one of my legal professors said something to this effect, he was a published constitutional scholar).  It's a very specific use case for ownership.


----------



## SuperMatt

DT said:


> It goes even further than that, the concept of a militia has a service element and organizational structures overseen by an elected governing body.  Militia doesn't mean a couple of fucknuts go out and buy guns and they're now a militia, it's more akin to being in the National Guard and keeping your equipment at home (one of my legal professors said something to this effect, he was a published constitutional scholar).  It's a very specific use case for ownership.



I agree with this 100% - the current 2nd amendment interpretation is NOT ”originalist” in any way, shape, or form. The right-wingers on the court are straight-up lying on that and they know it. They know that history as well as (probably better than) anhbody.


----------



## Yoused

P_X said:


> I'm sure the Founding Fathers would be proud of metal detectors and school body armors..



What form of public education, accessible to whom, was envisioned by the founding fathers?


----------



## SuperMatt

Yoused said:


> What form of public education, accessible to whom, was envisioned by the founding fathers?



Yet another good point. Which is why I think the “originalist” interpretation is a load of  coming from (the late) Justice Scalia and like-minded judges. It’s used an excuse for pushing ”conservative” interpretations of the law.


----------



## User.45

Yoused said:


> What form of public education, accessible to whom, was envisioned by the founding fathers?



Well, schools existed then too, and I suspect their parents too envisioned their children not to be massacred in school. It's just human nature, I guess.


----------



## User.45

SuperMatt said:


> I agree with this 100% - the current 2nd amendment interpretation is NOT ”originalist” in any way, shape, or form. The right-wingers on the court are straight-up lying on that and they know it. They know that history as well as (probably better than) anhbody.



There's a definite pattern that I've seen all over:  from 2A advocates when the actual 2nd Amendment is discussed.
The funny thing is, I really want to understand how they actually interpret the text, because I, on my own, just not seeing what they are seeing.


----------



## SuperMatt

P_X said:


> There's a definite pattern that I've seen all over:  from 2A advocates when the actual 2nd Amendment is discussed.
> The funny thing is, I really want to understand how they actually interpret the text, because I, on my own, just not seeing what they are seeing.



I enjoyed this article from the History channel about the amendment. There’s little indication it was ever meant to be interpreted the way it is today.









						The Second Amendment: A Complete History of the Right to Bear Arms
					

As a citizen of the United States, do I have the right to massacre a large group of my fellow citizens?  Of course not.   However, over the last two decades, a number of individuals have done exactly that; the settings of each incident now existing infused with terror (consider the impact of the...




					historycooperative.org


----------



## JayMysteri0

Not going to lie, I'm enjoying this trend of 'counter' Christmas cards

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1469448583728488451/


----------



## lizkat

I like THIS idea of something different in the realm of takes on the "pro-life" movement.  December 14th is the anniversary of the Sandy Hook slaughter in 2012 of 20 first graders and their six teachers / administrators.​​

​


----------



## Huntn

JayMysteri0 said:


> Not going to lie, I'm enjoying this trend of 'counter' Christmas cards
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1469448583728488451/



The difference in optics vs a family including young children armed with weapons is jaw dropping.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

hulugu said:


> a whole lot of gun owners are just going to be brown shirts for fascism, rather than some bulwark for freedom. They say they're there to fight for freedom, but so did the Chinese Communist party when it took over Tibet.




I read an article earlier talking about how the Democrat party used to be the party of freedom, saying it directly, and in understanding that living as a wage slave with housing instability means you’re not free and making a living also meant it also allowed you something to live for. Just paying your bills isn’t freedom or something you live for. The target was the oligarchs supported by Republicans that caused the Great Depression.

In that context I don’t know what these gun nuts think they are doing, that we’re going to reach the point that when it comes time to pay their rent or mortgage they’re going to show up, have a shootout, and if they don’t die than consider it paid for that month? Freedom!?


----------



## hulugu

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> I read an article earlier talking about how the Democrat party used to be the party of freedom, saying it directly, and in understanding that living as a wage slave with housing instability means you’re not free and making a living also meant it also allowed you something to live for. Just paying your bills isn’t freedom or something you live for. The target was the oligarchs supported by Republicans that caused the Great Depression.
> 
> In that context I don’t know what these gun nuts think they are doing, that we’re going to reach the point that when it comes time to pay their rent or mortgage they’re going to show up, have a shootout, and if they don’t die than consider it paid for that month? Freedom!?




Yeah, It's important to note that most of the people with large numbers of shiny-new AR-15s are relatively wealthy, and not the supposed members of the middle class. They're well-off right now. 

However, assuming a massive economic down-turn, maybe they could sell these weapons off. But considering that the market is probably saturated, I expect that a whole lot of people end up selling these for pennies on the dollar to cover the mortgage. 

I also don't see many of these people pulling a Dillinger, or a Manhattan Savings and Loan bank job, and robbing a bank to save the mortgage. Mostly, I expect a rash of suicides and murder-suicides as these gun nuts decide to kill their own starving family and themselves. 

It goes back to my whole problem with the zombie apocalypse, SHTF, prepper world. Like there are good reasons to have an earthquake kit or some supplies. But, people are investing real money in the idea that society will collapse, rather than trying to keep society from collapsing in the first place. And, gun nuts are largely dangerous freaks in a disaster, when what people really need are generators, field kitchens, and chainsaws. 

Having been to a lot of places where shit hit the fan, I've yet to see armed roving patrols do a lick of good compared to the one person who has a good medical kit with some field dressings, Advil and antibiotics. Mostly, these guys get in the way, try to "control" the situation with force, and when things get really bad, start acting as armed gangs.


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1472127506983657474/






Bonus gut punch
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1472278551055503360/


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

North Carolina 3-year-old who accidentally shot herself on Christmas Day has died
					

Aylee Gordon, a 3-year-old girl who accidentally suffered a gunshot wound on Christmas Day, died Tuesday evening, according to a release from the Henderson County Sheriff's Office.




					www.cnn.com
				




As Stalin said "One child accidentally shooting themselves or others is a tragedy.  Thousands of children doing it is American."


----------



## SuperMatt

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> North Carolina 3-year-old who accidentally shot herself on Christmas Day has died
> 
> 
> Aylee Gordon, a 3-year-old girl who accidentally suffered a gunshot wound on Christmas Day, died Tuesday evening, according to a release from the Henderson County Sheriff's Office.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As Stalin said "One child accidentally shooting themselves or others is a tragedy.  Thousands of children doing it is American."



These stories are a regular occurrence, and still people think “It’s a good idea to have unlocked firearms around the house.” Oh well, it’s been obvious since Sandy Hook that many Americans love their guns more than their kids. What a shame…


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

SuperMatt said:


> These stories are a regular occurrence, and still people think “It’s a good idea to have unlocked firearms around the house.” Oh well, it’s been obvious since Sandy Hook that many Americans love their guns more than their kids. What a shame…




I think it's safe to assume that there are patriots out there who feel one citizen killed by one illegal is one way too many.  But in these near-daily or weekly situations it's all "let's not jump to conclusions".


----------



## Yoused

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> North Carolina 3-year-old who accidentally shot herself on Christmas Day has died | CNN
> 
> 
> Aylee Gordon, a 3-year-old girl who accidentally suffered a gunshot wound on Christmas Day, died Tuesday evening, according to a release from the Henderson County Sheriff's Office.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As Stalin said "One child accidentally shooting themselves or others is a tragedy.  Thousands of children doing it is American."



No. She did not "accidentally" shoot herself in the head. She shot herself in the head. It was obviously unintentional, but this word for mishandling of guns has to stop being "accident".


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Yoused said:


> No. She did not "accidentally" shoot herself in the head. She shot herself in the head. It was obviously unintentional, but this word for mishandling of guns has to stop being "accident".












						North Carolina police officer shot his 15-year-old son in the head, district attorney says
					

A North Carolina police officer on Monday shot his 15-year-old son in the head in what appears to have been an accident, officials said.



					www.usatoday.com
				




well, here’s another “accident" by a trained professional.


----------



## SuperMatt

5 people killed in Denver by a racist, misogynist extremist.









						5 dead in Denver 'killing spree' by suspect with extremist views, police sources say
					

A gunman led police on a "killing spree" spanning two Colorado cities and leaving six dead, including the suspect, officials said.




					abcnews.go.com
				












						"War is coming"—Denver shooting suspect glorified guns and misogyny
					

In his tweets, Lyndon McLeod fixated on female chastity and lamented the "suppression" of "male honor violence."




					www.newsweek.com
				




One of the “very fine people” Trump told us all about.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

SuperMatt said:


> 5 people killed in Denver by a racist, misogynist extremist.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 5 dead in Denver 'killing spree' by suspect with extremist views, police sources say
> 
> 
> A gunman led police on a "killing spree" spanning two Colorado cities and leaving six dead, including the suspect, officials said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abcnews.go.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "War is coming"—Denver shooting suspect glorified guns and misogyny
> 
> 
> In his tweets, Lyndon McLeod fixated on female chastity and lamented the "suppression" of "male honor violence."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One of the “very fine people” Trump told us all about.




A comparable story from the other side of the spectrum….

Angry Progressive Extremist Volunteers at Homeless Shelter

In the days leading up to volunteering his social media posts were filled with outrage over inequality and a corrupt government that only serves to protect the profits of corporations. Family and friends noticed that he seemed to be becoming more unhinged over the previous several weeks claiming he was going to do something about it but none of them believed he was capable of volunteering. There are concerns that his actions may inspire more copycat volunteering.

But antifa


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Ohio girl, 16, fatally shot after her father thought she was an intruder, mother says
					

The girl, Janae Hairston, died Wednesday at a Columbus hospital about an hour after she was shot in the garage of her parents’ home.




					www.nbcnews.com
				




I’m thinking there are many other things he could have done before shooting her.  

Is there some kind of “when confused just shoot” rule?  Also is it legal to shoot somebody in your house just because you don’t recognize them? Is just them being there considered enough of a threat?  

I went to SF for Halloween one year in an area where there’s generally a lot of house parties going on. At one point my friend needed to go to the bathroom.  So we walked into a house that had the door wide open to see if we could use the bathroom.  We assumed there was a party going on or it just ended. The resident wasn’t amused but I’m sure if we were in TX we could have been shot and it would be considered completely justifiable.


----------



## SuperMatt

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> Ohio girl, 16, fatally shot after her father thought she was an intruder, mother says
> 
> 
> The girl, Janae Hairston, died Wednesday at a Columbus hospital about an hour after she was shot in the garage of her parents’ home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nbcnews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I’m thinking there are many other things he could have done before shooting her.
> 
> Is there some kind of “when confused just shoot” rule?  Also is it legal to shoot somebody in your house just because you don’t recognize them? Is just them being there considered enough of a threat?
> 
> I went to SF for Halloween one year in an area where there’s generally a lot of house parties going on. At one point my friend needed to go to the bathroom.  So we walked into a house that had the door wide open to see if we could use the bathroom.  We assumed there was a party going on or it just ended. The resident wasn’t amused but I’m sure if we were in TX we could have been shot and it would be considered completely justifiable.



Her dad must have gone to police academy.


----------



## Yoused

SuperMatt said:


> Her dad must have gone to police academy.



They teach how to shoot straight there?


----------



## Thomas Veil

Matt beat me to the Ohio story. The dad, I'm sure, won't be charged. Under Ohio law, he did nothing wrong.

Great job implementing Stand Your Ground, Ohio legislature.


----------



## User.45

Thomas Veil said:


> Matt beat me to the Ohio story. The dad, I'm sure, won't be charged. Under Ohio law, he did nothing wrong.
> 
> Great job implementing Stand Your Ground, Ohio legislature.



Ironically, people who are this afraid should invest in cameras. Cheaper than guns.


----------



## Yoused

P_X said:


> Ironically, people who are this afraid should invest in cameras. Cheaper than guns.



Yeah, you just know they will be remote-control cameras on a 12-gauge mount.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Texas toddler gets gun in car, shoots mother, sibling
					

Both the 2-year-old's mother and 1-year-old sibling were taken to hospital, but neither were severely wounded, police say.




					www.nbcnews.com
				




It’s time to start talking about banning toddlers.


----------



## SuperMatt

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> Texas toddler gets gun in car, shoots mother, sibling
> 
> 
> Both the 2-year-old's mother and 1-year-old sibling were taken to hospital, but neither were severely wounded, police say.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nbcnews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It’s time to start talking about banning toddlers.



The only thing that can stop a bad toddler with a gun is a good toddler with a gun. Every 2-year old needs to be issued a gun.

And this wasn’t a gun issue; it was clearly a mental health problem. The 2-year-old should have been in therapy.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

SuperMatt said:


> The only thing that can stop a bad toddler with a gun is a good toddler with a gun. Every 2-year old needs to be issued a gun.
> 
> And this wasn’t a gun issue; it was clearly a mental health problem. The 2-year-old should have been in therapy.




A shocking amount of toddlers have no respect for gun safety and make responsible gun owners look bad.  Also most toddlers are members of antifa.


----------



## lizkat

SuperMatt said:


> The only thing that can stop a bad toddler with a gun is a good toddler with a gun. Every 2-year old needs to be issued a gun.
> 
> And this wasn’t a gun issue; it was clearly a mental health problem. The 2-year-old should have been in therapy.




This end of the piece is interesting.  



> Police are still investigating and haven’t yet determined if any charges will be filed




Translation:   _this here is Texas, a gun went off, don't look like nobody died, so get over it._


----------



## User.45

Ad nauseam:

WE NEED TO START CHARGING THE OWNERS OF THESE GUNS.

#Personalresponsibility


----------



## SuperMatt

Police are refusing to release the 911 call audio from an officer shooting his teenage son.









						Son of North Carolina police officer shot by father has died
					

The son of a Jacksonville police officer has died following an accidental shooting that occurred Dec. 27, involving his father.




					www.wndu.com
				






> WITN requested both the 911 recording and the sheriff’s office radio broadcasts last week, both which are public records under state law.
> 
> The county has refused to release the 911 call, claiming it was a medical call and not a request for law enforcement. Both EMS and deputies were dispatched as a result of that telephone call.





> Onslow County deputies are still investigating the shooting. Once completed, that investigation will be sent to District Attorney Ernie Lee who will determine whether charges should be filed.




I’m sure the county deputies will do the right thing as they decide whether to charge the officer...


----------



## DT

P_X said:


> Ad nauseam:
> 
> WE NEED TO START CHARGING THE OWNERS OF THESE GUNS.
> 
> #Personalresponsibility





Seriously.  If I parked my car in front of an elementary school, left it running, the doors open, some 9 year old climbs in and plows through the other kids walking home, I'd probably die in prison.

But of course, cars aren't part of MUH FREEDOMS!!


----------



## lizkat

DT said:


> Seriously.  If I parked my car in front of an elementary school, left it running, the doors open, some 9 year old climbs in and plows through the other kids walking home, I'd probably die in prison.
> 
> But of course, cars aren't part of MUH FREEDOMS!!




If some of the good ol' boys around here had their druthers, car reggies and licenses would be entirely optional. 

Unless, of course the car has a bumperstick on it that says F the NRA.  In that case they'd probably like a friend on the sheriff's office to run the plate.  

The real bumperstick of choice here sometimes should be one that runs to 'F Cognitive Dissonance'.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

16-year-old girl shot and killed while walking dog in southwest Houston
					

A Houston teen was shot and killed while walking her dog in a southwest Houston neighborhood on Tuesday night.




					www.fox26houston.com
				




Shot 22 times?  Maybe that was a reporting error.   Seems a bit much for a street shooting.  Anyhow, nows not the time…


----------



## Yoused




----------



## Joe

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> 16-year-old girl shot and killed while walking dog in southwest Houston
> 
> 
> A Houston teen was shot and killed while walking her dog in a southwest Houston neighborhood on Tuesday night.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.fox26houston.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shot 22 times?  Maybe that was a reporting error.   Seems a bit much for a street shooting.  Anyhow, nows not the time…




It was her ex boyfriend. They arrested him.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

JagRunner said:


> It was her ex boyfriend. They arrested him.





I understand there are crimes of passion with related overkill, but shooting somebody 22 times is rare in an isolated building much less out on the street.  I don't even know how that is physically possible.   Did he use one of those firearms that we shouldn't ban and yet is capable of shooting somebody 22 times without anybody noticing?


----------



## Joe

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> I understand there are crimes of passion with related overkill, but shooting somebody 22 times is rare in an isolated building much less out on the street.  I don't even know how that is physically possible.   Did he use one of those firearms that we shouldn't ban and yet is capable of shooting somebody 22 times without anybody noticing?




You have to have a lot of rage to shoot someone 22 times. I don't know all the details, but I did see a tweet they arrested the ex boyfriend.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

JagRunner said:


> You have to have a lot of rage to shoot someone 22 times. I don't know all the details, but I did see a tweet they arrested the ex boyfriend.




What gun can you shoot somebody 22 times without anybody noticing it and what is the justification for owning it?


----------



## Yoused

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> what is the justification for owning it?




_Guns!_


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Yoused said:


> _Guns!_





You've made a compelling argument.  I shall now retreat to my ignorant libtard sanctuary.


----------



## DT

JFC, this fucker should do 20 years minimum:

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1482541499619360768/


From Jalopnik:

Seriously, what the hell could that guy possibly be thinking? He punches the Sportage’s door, then whips out his gun and lets loose into a sea of people and cars. Did he just stop after that _tenth _shot and think _“Well, that settles that! Job well done, Bri-dawg!”_

It’s incredible that nobody was hurt, considering how many people were in all those cars in the direction he was miserably flinging his rage-bullets. Some cars were damaged, though.

Despite his car and license plate being quite visible from the videos, it took Chintharsy’s sister convincing him to turn himself in to get him arrested. He’s currently jailed, on Assault and Battery with a deadly weapon charges.

What a jackass. This guy shouldn’t have a gun, or a car, or maybe even access to a stapler.


Top Comment (bold one of my constant harping points):

I’m a gun owner, and I use it for target shooting and I sometimes take it into the mountains for large animal protection if I’m alone (I also carry bear spray as a first line of defense). I’m also a very even keeled person, not prone to emotional outbursts. *But even I know that carrying a weapon daily only makes this kind of thing more likely. You get into heated situations and you start reaching for things that make you feel safe and in control and powerful. You don’t think about any other solution but your most powerful one. It’s a TERRIBLE idea for most people to be armed in most situations because we suck as dispassionately assessing the situation for actual threats.* It’s not a manliness thing or anything like it, it’s just pure monkey brain. Fight or Flight response and it’s a helluva thing to combat without training and experience.  Even then its iffy.


----------



## DT

From the Tusla PD FB page:


SHOOTING/ASSAULT ARREST

On 1/13/22, officers were called out to a shots fired call near the intersection of 11th and Sheridan. Callers reported a man got out of a car, started arguing with the driver of another vehicle, then started shooting as the car sped off.

When officers arrived, those involved in the shooting incident were gone. No one was injured in this incident, but officers found multiple shell casings and a white Buick SUV with multiple bullet holes. There were two people inside the Buick when it was hit.

Cell phone video of the incident was posted on social media over the weekend and shared many times with us.

The suspected shooter in the video has since been identified as Brian Chintharsy.

After the incident at 11th and Sheridan, we believe Chintharsy was also potentially involved in another crime where multiple shots were fired at a house. Fortunately, no one was injured in that case.

On 1/16/22, Brian Chintharsy came to the Tulsa County Jail and said he wanted to turn himself in for the actions he did on 1/13/2022.

Chintharsy is now in jail booked for:

- Assault & Battery with a Deadly Weapon x 2
- Shooting With Intent to Kill x 2
- Shooting Into an Occupied Dwelling

His bond is set at $325,000.

The investigation into this incident is ongoing. Anyone with information is asked to call Tulsa Crime Stoppers at 918-596-COPS. You can remain anonymous when calling.


----------



## Herdfan

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> What gun can you shoot somebody 22 times without anybody noticing it and what is the justification for owning it?




Just guessing, but a .22 semi-auto with subsonic ammo.

Any subsonic ammo really, but .22 is easy to get.  Other calibers not so easy.


----------



## Yoused

DT said:


> I’m also a very even keeled person, not prone to emotional outbursts.



This is why I do not own firearms. I tend to be pretty laid back, but my annoyance builds gradually to the point that my boiling point is a thing that needs to be treated with due caution. If I had a gun, I might have some dead neighbors. I like to think it would not come to that, but not having a gun is a fine way to not find out.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

DT said:


> From the Tusla PD FB page:
> 
> 
> Cell phone video of the incident was posted on social media over the weekend and shared many times with us.




So did the video get sent directly to the police or did they just post it on social media and call it a day?  

Sometimes I question the motivation of people shooting video of situations, like they're more interested in "check out this crazy shit I saw!" social media attention.


----------



## DT

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> So did the video get sent directly to the police or did they just post it on social media and call it a day?
> 
> Sometimes I question the motivation of people shooting video of situations, like they're more interested in "check out this crazy shit I saw!" social media attention.




It was posted to social media as a solution to share the video directly with the police.  You have to keep in mind, most people don't know how to directly upload a video, or can't, or there's no way to do so directly through the official PD website, or they don't know how to post it to a private resource and link that to some kind of web based report.

I get the point and the whole "social media is bad" perspective (and maybe that's a good topic for a whole separate thread),  but at least in this case, using social media provided both a mechanism to communicate directly with law enforcement and a general public channel to maybe provide additional information / issue warnings, about the perpetrator.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

DT said:


> It was posted to social media as a solution to share the video directly with the police.  You have to keep in mind, most people don't know how to directly upload a video, or can't, or there's no way to do so directly through the official PD website, or they don't know how to post it to a private resource and link that to some kind of web based report.




I understand using that method.  My concern was they uploaded the video but didn't contact the police about it.  The part I quoted made it sound like it was only brought to their attention by social media viewers and not the person who shot the video.


----------



## Joe

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> What gun can you shoot somebody 22 times without anybody noticing it and what is the justification for owning it?




 Apparently there could have been more than 1 shooter, which could explain the 22 shots...but it's still under investigation last I read.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

JagRunner said:


> Apparently there could have been more than 1 shooter, which could explain the 22 shots...but it's still under investigation last I read.




Friends help friends shoot their girlfriend.  It's in the bible.


----------



## lizkat

And then there's the provenance of guns used to shoot police officers in NYC in two recent cases.









						The gun that the police say was used highlights a persistent problem.
					






					www.nytimes.com
				






> The provenance of the gun the police say was used to shoot two officers on Friday reflects what Mayor Eric Adams and others have called an urgent problem: the flow of illegal firearms up the so-called Iron Pipeline from the South to New York and other northern cities.
> 
> The weapon, which officials said was a Glock 45 pistol with a high-capacity magazine that could hold up to 40 additional rounds, _*was reported stolen in Baltimore in 2017*_.






> It was the second gun this week to be used to shoot a New York City officer after traveling south to north. On Tuesday night, the police said, a 16-year-old shot an officer in the leg during a confrontation in the Bronx, using a _*handgun that had been stolen in South Carolina in 2020*_.


----------



## SuperMatt

lizkat said:


> And then there's the provenance of guns used to shoot police officers in NYC in two recent cases.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The gun that the police say was used highlights a persistent problem.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com



Another reason for nationwide gun control. There is no point to trying to control guns in northern cities when they can be bought legally by the dozens in other states and brought in.


----------



## Huntn

lizkat said:


> And then there's the provenance of guns used to shoot police officers in NYC in two recent cases.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The gun that the police say was used highlights a persistent problem.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com



The abundance of guns is a frick’n nightmare for law enforcement.


----------



## ronntaylor

lizkat said:


> And then there's the provenance of guns used to shoot police officers in NYC in two recent cases.



That's likely BS. If enough energy and resources were put into tracking the owners, I'm sure that there would be a ton of guns from a relatively small amount of owners that wind up in crime scenes.


----------



## lizkat

ronntaylor said:


> That's likely BS. If enough energy and resources were put into tracking the owners, I'm sure that there would be a ton of guns from a relatively small amount of owners that wind up in crime scenes.




The umbrella problem is that all the states can have different laws.  Texas for instance doesn't even require reporting lost or stolen weapons.  Some states have quotas on how many guns one person can buy in a month, supposedly to constrain reselling by straw purchasers, etc.  But in states where the quota is generous, then the resales may occur elsewhere and without benefit of background checks, in some other state with stricter laws. 

And then there is attitudinal law enforcement:   we already know that there can be a level of disdain for recording incidents that would prevent someone from being able to purchase a gun in future, e.g. domestic violence conviction.   So even when there are good laws, resistance to enforcement of them can be a residual issue.


----------



## User.168

.


----------



## User.45

theSeb said:


> Wisconsin GOP lawmakers approve bill allowing 18-year-olds to carry guns at schools, churches. Sounds like a great idea to me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wisconsin GOP lawmakers approve bill allowing 18-year-olds to carry guns at schools, churches
> 
> 
> Wisconsin GOP lawmakers passed a bill through the state Assembly that would allow 18-year-olds to carry guns at school.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abc7chicago.com



This is so absurd, it's funny. Thank God they won't be able to drink and gun at the same time.


----------



## Yoused

P_X said:


> Thank God they won't be able to drink and gun at the same time.



I would not count on that. In Wisconsin, where the Tavern Association owns the state house, you can bring your under-age spawn into a bar and buy them a drink. In my state, no one under 21 enters a drinking establishment, end of story.


----------



## User.45

Yoused said:


> I would not count on that. In Wisconsin, where the Tavern Association owns the state house, you can bring your under-age spawn into a bar and buy them a drink. In my state, no one under 21 enters a drinking establishment, end of story.



Oh yeah I remember whats his face. Kittenmouse drinking.


----------



## Yoused

12y/o writes letter to governor saying the permitless carry law is a bad idea.









						‘People will be murdered.’ Memphis boy wrote letter to governor about gun law before a bullet took his life
					

MEMPHIS, Tenn. — Artemis Rayford was 12 years old when he wrote a letter last year to Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee, expressing concern about a new state law that allows most adults to legally carry a gu…




					wreg.com
				




Random bullet from outside takes care of his complaint for good,


----------



## DT

DT said:


> JFC, this fucker should do 20 years minimum:




Another rager idiot, that casually draws a weapon, not in specific self-defense, but "just in case".  This is the longer version of the video if you've seen the one where it starts with him shooting - this one shows the intent, to escalate with a firearm.

The thing that really stood out to me, is how scared and out of control he is - there's this in-head fantasy that the "hero with a gun" is going to be John Wick, and so many times they're just a threat to themselves and innocent bystanders.









						Watch this: Video from inside shooter’s car captures road rage incident
					

A shocking sight caught on video from the inside of a car as a man fires nearly a dozen shots out of his car on busy I-95.




					www.local10.com


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

theSeb said:


> Wisconsin GOP lawmakers approve bill allowing 18-year-olds to carry guns at schools, churches. Sounds like a great idea to me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wisconsin GOP lawmakers approve bill allowing 18-year-olds to carry guns at schools, churches
> 
> 
> Wisconsin GOP lawmakers passed a bill through the state Assembly that would allow 18-year-olds to carry guns at school.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abc7chicago.com





Is this the first piece of pro mass shooter legislation or are there others?


----------



## User.168

.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

theSeb said:


> No idea. This is stuff that I happen to spot on the tinternet. or via Apple News.




Personally, I think the law is far too broad and open to potential abuse.  So I think they should add the prerequisite that the gun carrier should also have noted issues with their relationship, classmates, or teachers.  You know, so they can spot a potential bad guy shooter with the same issues.  It takes one to know one.  This is just a common-sense approach.


----------



## User.168

.


----------



## Joe

DT said:


> Another rager idiot, that casually draws a weapon, not in specific self-defense, but "just in case".  This is the longer version of the video if you've seen the one where it starts with him shooting - this one shows the intent, to escalate with a firearm.
> 
> The thing that really stood out to me, is how scared and out of control he is - there's this in-head fantasy that the "hero with a gun" is going to be John Wick, and so many times they're just a threat to themselves and innocent bystanders.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Watch this: Video from inside shooter’s car captures road rage incident
> 
> 
> A shocking sight caught on video from the inside of a car as a man fires nearly a dozen shots out of his car on busy I-95.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.local10.com




He was an idiot for shooting at the car, but the other driver was also an idiot. He tailgated the guy after he was cut off and then threw a water bottle at his car. This is just proof that it's not worth getting into an altercation with people on the road. You don't know what the other person is capable of. You don't know their mental health. Road Rage has gotten so bad that I don't even honk at people for driving like an idiot, unless they are about to collide or hit me. If someone cuts me off I just cuss to myself in the car and move on to live another day. It's not worth it. 

I bet the guy that got shot at won't do that again. I'm not saying he deserves to be shot at, but you need to pick and choose your battles. Road Rage is not worth it.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

theSeb said:


> Some basic background checks and a licence to carry, once the person has demonstrated proficiency, would be the first steps, but I cannot imagine that ever becoming acceptable in the US




As the saying goes, you're a stable responsible gun owner until you're not.  Unfortunately, that switch over is usually denoted by somebody getting killed.


----------



## lizkat

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> Is this the first piece of pro mass shooter legislation or are there others?




Well it's among the first splashy platforms from which 2022 campaign ads can be built in Wisconsin for sure.

And it is in fact a load of showboating, not only because the governor is a Dem and will veto the thing if it passes in the state senate, but also because the passage in the state assembly was... get this...  by_* voice vote.  *_Yeah. Lotta courage involved in shouting huzzah for yet more gun rights along with the rest of Wisconsin's Republican side of its assembly. What would take guts is an interview on the statehouse steps by an R whose nay vote was drowned out. No one should hold breath for that.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

lizkat said:


> Well it's among the first splashy platforms from which 2022 campaign ads can be built in Wisconsin for sure.
> 
> And it is in fact a load of showboating, not only because the governor is a Dem and will veto the thing if it passes in the state senate, but also because the passage in the state assembly was... get this...  by_* voice vote.  *_Yeah. Lotta courage involved in shouting huzzah for yet more gun rights along with the rest of Wisconsin's Republican side of its assembly. What would take guts is an interview on the statehouse steps by an R whose nay vote was drowned out. No one should hold breath for that.




I can't imagine a lot of parents being pleased about the prospect of high school kids being armed, well except for the halfwits who think it would only be their kid and he is one of the good guys.


----------



## Herdfan

theSeb said:


> Some basic background checks and a licence to carry, once the person has demonstrated proficiency, would be the first steps, but I cannot imagine that ever becoming acceptable in the US




Make it a national law and I think you would be surprised at just how many gun owners would support it.


----------



## Renzatic

Herdfan said:


> Make it a national law and I think you would be surprised at just how many gun owners would support it.




Most responsible gun owners are perfectly fine with some form of gun control and background checks. It's doing so without the talking heads screaming COMMUNISM, making it into another wedge issue to hammer during an election season that's the challenge.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Herdfan said:


> Make it a national law and I think you would be surprised at just how many gun owners would support it.




I think there are some national laws that responsible 2nd amendment supporters would support.  I think a lot of anti-gun people hear "What's the point if somebody can just cross the county or state line to get a gun?" as a deflection to passing any new laws but it could actually be an opportunity.


----------



## User.168

.


----------



## ronntaylor

About an hour away. IIRC, hubby participated in some conference (retreat?) there a few years ago. We were just discussing security protocols should something like this happen on campus. His school is supposedly already revising security plans and addressed today's shooting.









						Two Officers Killed at Bridgewater College in Virginia
					

A 27-year-old suspect was caught after a widespread search at the college, about 40 miles from Charlottesville, the authorities said.




					www.nytimes.com
				






> In an email sent at 5:04 p.m. to the students and faculty, David Bushman, the president of the college, identified the victims as John Painter, a police officer, and J.J. Jefferson, a campus safety officer. They were often referred to as a “dynamic duo,” Mr. Bushman said. “John was J.J.’s best man in his wedding this year,” he added.


----------



## DT

JagRunner said:


> I bet the guy that got shot at won't do that again.




I bet that guy goes and buys MUH GUN, so next time someone cuts him off, he can properly retaliate ... and like people said, in Flori-duh, make sure you shoot first.

(Very much agree with the PSA, don't escalate anything on the road)


----------



## User.45

theSeb said:


> i believe that you are right. Most polls show gun owners are in favour of gun controls like I mentioned. Most polls show the same data for all America. But nothing is ever done, as per @Renzatic





Herdfan said:


> Make it a national law and I think you would be surprised at just how many gun owners would support it.





Renzatic said:


> Most responsible gun owners are perfectly fine with some form of gun control and background checks. It's doing so without the talking heads screaming COMMUNISM, making it into another wedge issue to hammer during an election season that's the challenge.



1. Polls indicate that America is a lot more left-leaning when policy proposals packaged without party politics involved, but a substantial proportion of these people still vote against these principles on election day.
2. As we have noticed you can't get a senate majority past the filibuster threshold running on a platform advocating for gun regulation. It's a fact.


----------



## DT

I can't even figure out what the ...


https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1491578663904677889/


----------



## User.45

DT said:


> I can't even figure out what the ...
> 
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1491578663904677889/



I'm pretty sure the finger shouldn't go behind the trigger either. They are looking like a JCPenney catalog.


----------



## User.168

.


----------



## Huntn

P_X said:


> I'm pretty sure the finger shouldn't go behind the trigger either. They are looking like a JCPenney catalog.



SICK on multiple levels (The image).


----------



## DT

theSeb said:


> Finger behind the trigger, not resting on front of it, is at least showing a bit of gun safety.




In Russia, gun fingers you!


(Clearly this is looks like some kind of eastern European location ...)


----------



## Huntn

Yeah, _we’re good ole, not so bright gun toting Amer-i-kans  always ready to shoot first, give us a reason, any reason. _


----------



## User.168

.


----------



## Yoused

Huntn said:


> Yeah, _we’re good ole, not so bright gun toting *Amer-i-kans* always ready to shoot first, give us a reason, any reason. _



You left a couple "k"s out, there. Please try to spell this word correctly.

Also, try to shoot the bear, not the brother (or yourself).









						Misfire at Oregon bear results in death of two US brothers
					

The man accidentally shoots his brother while loading a gun to aim at a bear on their property.



					www.bbc.com


----------



## Huntn

Yoused said:


> You left a couple "k"s out, there. Please try to spell this word correctly.
> 
> Also, try to shoot the bear, not the brother (or yourself).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Misfire at Oregon bear results in death of two US brothers
> 
> 
> The man accidentally shoots his brother while loading a gun to aim at a bear on their property.
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.com



Was there a bear or murder suicide?


----------



## Yoused

Huntn said:


> Was there a bear or murder suicide?



There was a bear, and his name was Darwin.


----------



## User.168

.


----------



## SuperMatt

At a protest against police violence in Portland last night, multiple people were shot, and at least one is dead.

https://news.yahoo.com/portland-shooting-near-amir-locke-081812549.html

Also of interest as I looked at the police department’s statement: There was also an “officer-involved shooting” the same night. Here are snippets of police department descriptions of the two incidents.



> When officers arrived they located a female victim who was deceased. Additional shooting victims, two men and three women, were transported to area hospitals and their status is unknown at this time.






> The subject of the officer involved shooting died at the scene, and no officers were hurt




If you’re killed by a police officer, you’re not a victim, nor is your gender revealed. You are not a human being. You are a “subject.” Most importantly, they don’t care if you are dead; what’s more important is that no officers were hurt. Now, I don’t know if the “subject” of the police killing was shooting at them or just asleep on a park bench. It doesn’t say. But they use the same language no matter whether the officer is at fault or not. It really tells you the point of view of the department.


----------



## Yoused

SuperMatt said:


> If you’re killed by a police officer, you’re not a victim, nor is your gender revealed. You are not a human being. You are a “subject.” Most importantly, they don’t care if you are dead; what’s more important is that no officers were hurt. Now, I don’t know if the “subject” of the police killing was shooting at them or just asleep on a park bench. It doesn’t say. But they use the same language no matter whether the officer is at fault or not. It really tells you the point of view of the department.




_There were no cameras on the scene to fuck up our narrative._


----------



## Yoused

Here is a site that offers the "JR-15" in an effort to "_introduce children to the shooting sports_". Because, what better way for young'uns to learn about guns than a tiny assault rifle?


----------



## SuperMatt

This study shows that “Stand your Ground” laws lead to an increase in preventable violent deaths. They also show no positive effect on public safety and/or deterring violence.









						“Stand Your Ground” Self-defense Laws and Statewide Rates of Homicides and Firearm Homicides
					

This cohort study evaluates the association of “stand your ground” laws with US homicide and firearm rates nationally and by state.




					jamanetwork.com


----------



## User.168

.


----------



## User.45

SuperMatt said:


> This study shows that “Stand your Ground” laws lead to an increase in preventable violent deaths. They also show no positive effect on public safety and/or deterring violence.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “Stand Your Ground” Self-defense Laws and Statewide Rates of Homicides and Firearm Homicides
> 
> 
> This cohort study evaluates the association of “stand your ground” laws with US homicide and firearm rates nationally and by state.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jamanetwork.com



I and why should we believe a bunch of Italians from London writing against our guns in a clearly left-leaning magazine?!!!11!!!!

/s of course


----------



## User.45

It's funny how different the message is holding a gun, when you you can expect to be shot back at.


----------



## Thomas Veil

I saw that woman on MSNBC last night and admired her courage.


----------



## DT

P_X said:


> It's funny how different the message is holding a gun, when you you can expect to be shot back at.




Right?  vs. a family of privileged white people sitting around a christmas tree in their mansion holding weapons like a fucking playtoy ...


----------



## Joe




----------



## User.45

Joe said:


> View attachment 12029



I'm pretty sure they weren't getting AR-15s. Boom. Resolved. Next!


----------



## SuperMatt

Joe said:


> View attachment 12029



I believe the situation in Ukraine is similar to what the American founders were talking about when they wrote the 2nd amendment. It was NOT for people to carry guns everywhere and shoot each other at the movie theater, or mass-murder kindergarteners. I would have NO problem with each locality maintaining an armory with weapons to be distributed in case some country invades.


----------



## Herdfan

P_X said:


> I'm pretty sure they weren't getting AR-15s. Boom. Resolved. Next!




Nope.  Because:

1) AR's aren't automatic regardless of what the gun-hating media may have led you to believe.

2) They are getting full-auto AK's.  Which fire a NATO 7.62x39 round as opposed to a NATO 5.56 which the AR fires. I could get into ballistics and kinetic energy comparisons of the two rounds, but I will leave it with "It makes a bigger hole".


----------



## Hrafn

SuperMatt said:


> I believe the situation in Ukraine is similar to what the American founders were talking about when they wrote the 2nd amendment. It was NOT for people to carry guns everywhere and shoot each other at the movie theater, or mass-murder kindergarteners. I would have NO problem with each locality maintaining an armory with weapons to be distributed in case some country invades.



Without getting political, I suspect that if the average American were in the situation in Ukraine, despite loving their guns, they would crap themselves, start to run away and suffer a major heart attack.


----------



## Yoused

Herdfan said:


> 1) AR's aren't automatic regardless of what the gun-hating media may have led you to believe.



True, but with a bump stock, you can get off enough rounds in short order as to melt the barrel (which, of course, is another indication that they are not full-auto, as otherwise they would be designed to handle the auto heat load).


----------



## User.45

Herdfan said:


> Nope.  Because:
> 
> 1) AR's aren't automatic regardless of what the gun-hating media may have led you to believe.





Herdfan said:


> 2) They are getting full-auto AK's.  Which fire a NATO 7.62x39 round as opposed to a NATO 5.56 which the AR fires. I could get into ballistics and kinetic energy comparisons of the two rounds, but I will leave it with "It makes a bigger hole".



Congrats! You've successfully explained the punchlines of my joke. 
I guess humor is harder than ballistics.


----------



## Eric

Herdfan said:


> Nope.  Because:
> 
> 1) AR's aren't automatic regardless of what the gun-hating media may have led you to believe.



Funny, we like to call anyone supporting guns that are designed to kill as many as quickly and easily as possible kindergarten children-haters. If only Republicans were as passionate about keeping those children alive as they were getting these weapons in the hands of every right-wing nutjob who can get their hands on one.


----------



## User.45

Eric said:


> Funny, we like to call anyone supporting guns that are designed to kill as many as quickly and easily as possible kindergarten children-haters. If only Republicans were as passionate about keeping those children alive as they were getting these weapons in the hands of every right-wing nutjob who can get their hands on one.



The complete lack of insight is just tragicomical. The comical part is these guys thinking they are so deep by pointing out that it's helpful to be armed in an actual war. The tragic part is that they fail to see the difference between war and normal life. The scary part is that people with such bad judgement carry weapons.


----------



## Herdfan

P_X said:


> Congrats! You've successfully explained the punchlines of my joke.
> I guess humor is harder than ballistics.




As much bad information is out there regarding AR's, it is hard to tell when someone is joking vs not knowing what they are talking about.


----------



## Huntn

Eric said:


> Funny, we like to call anyone supporting guns that are designed to kill as many as quickly and easily as possible kindergarten children-haters. If only Republicans were as passionate about keeping those children alive as they were getting these weapons in the hands of every right-wing nutjob who can get their hands on one.



Exactly, Gun worship is the result of the 2A going off the rails. It’s no longer being worried about the collateral damage, as opposed to the supposed selfish benefit, even going as far pushing that lethal weapons should not be regulated.

I’d  to see the 2A fixed but that’s never going to happen with the percentage of selfish, non-caring, relatively low intelligence asshats who compose both our citizens and our elected officials. (Comnent not directed at anyone in the forum).


----------



## User.45

Herdfan said:


> As much bad information is out there regarding AR's, it is hard to tell when someone is joking vs not knowing what they are talking about.



So you assumed that 
1) someone coming from around that part of the world isn't aware that Kalashnikovs and not ARs are the local standard
2) nobody else knows what you define as automatic weapon (emphasis on your definition given the bum stocks mentioned above)
3) anybody would take seriously what @Joe's post implied
+ bonus for your commentary on how much boom-boom sticks can boom.
+ conveniently ignored how these boom-boom sticks had overthrown ZERO tyrants in America, unless you consider kindergarten children tyrants.


----------



## DT

Herdfan said:


> As much bad information is out there regarding AR's, it is hard to tell when someone is joking vs not knowing what they are talking about.




Here's the thing:  if you reduce this down to the real basics of the issue, why does it matter?  I know gun fanatics always dive into the very specific details of firearm mechanics/ballistics/etc.,i.e., this:



Herdfan said:


> Which fire a NATO 7.62x39 round as opposed to a NATO 5.56 which the AR fires




That's just mastabatory gun spew.  When a kid gets shot, nobody should GAF about whether the ft/sec of the round used is omitted or if the firearm used might be technically, inaccurately, referred to as an "assault rifle".  I mean, seriously, I've seen this exchange, almost verbatim:

_"I saw a kid shot 5 other students with an automatic rifle at a high school today!"

"LOL, it was a semi-automatic"._

Fuck that.


----------



## User.45

DT said:


> _"I saw a kid shot 5 other students with an automatic rifle at a high school today!"
> 
> "LOL, it was a semi-automatic"._
> 
> Fuck that.



Those conversations make me think about whether I'm hearing 15-year-old LARPers, or full on sociopaths..


----------



## SuperMatt

DT said:


> Here's the thing:  if you reduce this down to the real basics of the issue, why does it matter?  I know gun fanatics always dive into the very specific details of firearm mechanics/ballistics/etc.,i.e., this:
> 
> 
> 
> That's just mastabatory gun spew.  When a kid gets shot, nobody should GAF about whether the ft/sec of the round used is omitted or if the firearm used might be technically, inaccurately, referred to as an "assault rifle".  I mean, seriously, I've seen this exchange, almost verbatim:
> 
> _"I saw a kid shot 5 other students with an automatic rifle at a high school today!"
> 
> "LOL, it was a semi-automatic"._
> 
> Fuck that.



You nailed it. Instead of EVER conceding that guns might be a problem, they throw a hissy fit if you mis-classify exactly what type of gun was used to murder innocent people.

Let’s go to an actual well-regulated militia, where we store the community‘s weapons at local armories. You can check them out for target practice or training. Otherwise, they stay there to be distributed if we ever NEED a militia to repel an attacking force. We could make an exception for one handgun to be kept in a person’s house, with mandatory gun safe and trigger lock… if we want to still keep the idea of using guns for self-defense… which isn’t necessarily what the 2nd amendment guarantees.


----------



## User.45

SuperMatt said:


> You nailed it. Instead of EVER conceding that guns might be a problem, they throw a hissy fit if you mis-classify exactly what type of gun was used to murder innocent people.
> 
> Let’s go to an actual well-regulated militia, where we store the community‘s weapons at local armories. You can check them out for target practice or training. Otherwise, they stay there to be distributed if we ever NEED a militia to repel an attacking force. We could make an exception for one handgun to be kept in a person’s house, with mandatory gun safe and trigger lock… if we want to still keep the idea of using guns for self-defense… which isn’t necessarily what the 2nd amendment guarantees.



You'll notice one thing, the moment you want to have a meaningful discussion about how we could compromise about fulfilling the actual intended purpose of 2A and gun hoarding by LARPers, you'll get crickets.


----------



## Herdfan

DT said:


> Here's the thing:  if you reduce this down to the real basics of the issue, why does it matter?  I know gun fanatics always dive into the very specific details of firearm mechanics/ballistics/etc.,i.e., this:
> 
> 
> 
> That's just mastabatory gun spew.  When a kid gets shot, nobody should GAF about whether the ft/sec of the round used is omitted or if the firearm used might be technically, inaccurately, referred to as an "assault rifle".  I mean, seriously, I've seen this exchange, almost verbatim:
> 
> _"I saw a kid shot 5 other students with an automatic rifle at a high school today!"
> 
> "LOL, it was a semi-automatic"._
> 
> Fuck that.




I actually agree with this.

And if the media was simply presenting information, then you would be correct in that it wouldn't matter.

But they do have an agenda.  And if you are going to have an agenda then you are going to be corrected on every little thing.


----------



## User.45

Herdfan said:


> And if you are going to have an agenda then you are going to be corrected on every little thing.



Nobody is more experienced about this than you on this forum


----------



## Herdfan

P_X said:


> Nobody is more experienced about this than you on this forum




Touche'.


----------



## SuperMatt

Herdfan said:


> But they do have an agenda.



Who are the members of “they” and what is “their” agenda?


----------



## Joe

SuperMatt said:


> I believe the situation in Ukraine is similar to what the American founders were talking about when they wrote the 2nd amendment. It was NOT for people to carry guns everywhere and shoot each other at the movie theater, or mass-murder kindergarteners. I would have NO problem with each locality maintaining an armory with weapons to be distributed *in case some country invades.*




It won't be another country


----------



## SuperMatt

Eric said:


> Florida summed up in a single tweet.
> 
> 
> Florida, USA from
> WhitePeopleTwitter



Here’s a sad (but 100% predictable) update to this story.





__





						No charges to be filed in fatal shooting of Volusia library assistant
					





					www.msn.com
				






> In a statement Tuesday, the State Attorney’s Office said after reviewing the case they would not be filing criminal charges.
> 
> “While the facts in this case are truly heart-breaking, the law does not authorize the filing of any criminal charges. Our sincerest* thoughts and prayers* go out to the Morales family,” the statement said.



I’m not a lawyer, but if the law truly "does not authorize the filing of any criminal charges," then the law is seriously f-ed up.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

SuperMatt said:


> Here’s a sad (but 100% predictable) update to this story.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No charges to be filed in fatal shooting of Volusia library assistant
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.msn.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I’m not a lawyer, but if the law truly "does not authorize the filing of any criminal charges," then the law is seriously f-ed up.




They're both idiots.  It's an avalanche of "and that's where it should have ended" that just keeps going.  Instead of pulling out their guns they should have pulled out cell phones, shot a couple photos or videos and gone on with their day.


----------



## SuperMatt

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> They're both idiots.  It's an avalanche of "and that's where it should have ended" that just keeps going.  Instead of pulling out their guns they should have pulled out cell phones, shot a couple photos or videos and gone on with their day.



In the end somebody was gunned down, on their own property, and nobody held responsible.

And I STRONGLY disagree with equal blame for both parties here. You do NOT follow somebody home after a fender bender, period... and you don’t harass them at home, and then gun them down when they come out of their house with a gun to try and scare you off. Should she have stayed in her home? I don’t know. Perhaps these guys would have come in. She probably thought waving the gun around would scare them off. She had to calculate how best to survive - HOPE the biker gang that followed her home won’t come in and kill her, or try to scare them off with a gun?

That guy deserves to be in jail, and the Florida legislature still won’t fix this law. They are made up of 2-3 baskets worth of deplorables.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

SuperMatt said:


> In the end somebody was gunned down, on their own property, and nobody held responsible.
> 
> And I STRONGLY disagree with equal blame for both parties here. You do NOT follow somebody home after a fender bender, period... and you don’t harass them at home, and then gun them down when they come out of their house with a gun to try and scare you off. Should she have stayed in her home? I don’t know. Perhaps these guys would have come in. She probably thought waving the gun around would scare them off. She had to calculate how best to survive - HOPE the biker gang that followed her home won’t come in and kill her, or try to scare them off with a gun?
> 
> That guy deserves to be in jail, and the Florida legislature still won’t fix this law. They are made up of 2-3 baskets worth of deplorables.




I'm going back to where it started. "Officers said a blue Kia driven by 35-year-old Sara Morales intentionally hit a motorcycle and fled the scene." followed by "they told Morales to stop and that law enforcement had been called." Doesn't sound like she was just innocently minding her own business and out of nowhere this all went down for no reason.  

And if you are truly scared you stay in your house and wait for the police, not run out and start pointing a gun at people, especially in Florida where there's a good chance that what ended up happening would happen.  This was somebody who was emboldened by having a gun, somehow believing waving it around would de-escalate the situation instead of the exact opposite.  Its top tier gun culture.


----------



## SuperMatt

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> I'm going back to where it started. "Officers said a blue Kia driven by 35-year-old Sara Morales intentionally hit a motorcycle and fled the scene." followed by "they told Morales to stop and that law enforcement had been called." Doesn't sound like she was just innocently minding her own business and out of nowhere this all went down for no reason.
> 
> And if you are truly scared you stay in your house and wait for the police, not run out and start pointing a gun at people, especially in Florida where there's a good chance that what ended up happening would happen.  This was somebody who was emboldened by having a gun, somehow believing waving it around would de-escalate the situation instead of the exact opposite.  Its top tier gun culture.



It was a fender bender, with no apparent damage to the motorcycle, and the driver didn’t even fall off the bike, as his friends told the operator.

The only people who can corroborate the story that she “intentionally” hit the motorcycle? The biker’s friends who drove with him as he illegally followed her home.

This murderer disobeyed the law, which says to report the event to the police and then wait “at the scene” for the police to arrive. He did NOT wait at the scene as the law required. He disobeyed that law, and tried to take the law into his own hands, for no good reason.

You do NOT follow another driver home after a fender bender, especially when you already got their plate information. And if somebody is on their own lawn waving a gun around, you LEAVE THEIR PROPERTY. You don’t shoot them.

WTF is up with the both-sides nonsense? Sometimes one ”side” is just plain wrong.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

SuperMatt said:


> It was a fender bender, with no apparent damage to the motorcycle, and the driver didn’t even fall off the bike, as his friends told the operator.
> 
> The only people who can corroborate the story that she “intentionally” hit the motorcycle? The biker’s friends who drove with him as he illegally followed her home.
> 
> This murderer disobeyed the law, which says to report the event to the police and then wait “at the scene” for the police to arrive. He did NOT wait at the scene as the law required. He disobeyed that law, and tried to take the law into his own hands, for no good reason.
> 
> You do NOT follow another driver home after a fender bender, especially when you already got their plate information. And if somebody is on their own lawn waving a gun around, you LEAVE THEIR PROPERTY. You don’t shoot them.
> 
> WTF is up with the both-sides nonsense? Sometimes one ”side” is just plain wrong.




Um, she also left the scene. And after she was told to wait because the police were on their way. Getting shot doesn’t automatically excuse a string of bad decisions before it got there, especially if you were the one who brought guns into the situation. What was she thinking, that somebody who called the police would a short while later shoot her at home while waiting for them to arrive? That makes zero sense. “Hello, police. A woman hit our motorcycle and is leaving the scene. I’m going to follow her and give her a beatdown at the first opportunity. See you there.”


----------



## SuperMatt

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> Um, she also left the scene. And after she was told to wait because the police were on their way. Getting shot doesn’t automatically excuse a string of bad decisions before it got there, especially if you were the one who brought guns into the situation. What was she thinking, that somebody who called the police would a short while later shoot her at home while waiting for them to arrive? That makes zero sense. “Hello, police. A woman hit our motorcycle and is leaving the scene. I’m going to follow her and give her a beatdown at the first opportunity. See you there.”



Well, I strongly disagree. Perhaps if a group of angry bikers followed you home and harassed you, you’d see the other side of this. In the end, the law is to blame. Either party could have claimed “stand your ground” in this case. It’s beyond absurd when the law allowed a person to be followed home, then shot on their own property, and it’s excused by a “stand your ground” law. Following somebody for miles is not “standing your ground” at all.

Perhaps it is hard for me to understand the side of this where you would follow somebody home after they left the scene, especially if you already got their license plate. I mean, whatever damage to your car, when the cops get there to file their report, the other driver can’t defend themselves, so you’re in a great position when it comes to insurance.


----------



## Thomas Veil

Well, I'm just so happy. 









						Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine signs permitless concealed carry bill into law | CNN Politics
					

Eligible adults in Ohio will soon be able to carry a concealed handgun without a license or training following legislation signed into law Monday night by Republican Gov. Mike DeWine.




					www.cnn.com
				






> When stopped by police, a person will no longer have to "promptly inform" the officer that they're carrying a concealed handgun, though they will have to disclose that they have a concealed handgun when an officer asks them.
> The law also lowers the penalty for not telling a police officer about a concealed handgun from a first-degree misdemeanor to a second-degree misdemeanor and does not allow a police officer to arrest a person solely because they didn't promptly show their concealed carry license.





> People who had violated the prior notification requirements may also apply to have their record expunged.





> Once in effect, the new law will still allow Ohioans to apply for concealed carry permits, but undergoing training and background check to legally carry a concealed handgun will be optional.





> "Nowhere in the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution does it say you have to have training to defend yourself or to bear arms," Republican state Sen. Terry Johnson, who sponsored Senate Bill 215, said last fall.




The Constitution doesn't say you have to take Driver's Ed to drive a car, either, so I guess we'll just let everybody behind the wheel without knowing traffic laws or how to aim two tons of rolling metal and gasoline. 

Cops, needless to say, are not big fans of this new law. Nor should they be.

But hey, on the positive side...more people will be running around, in our increasingly angry society, with lethal weapons on their person without even the slightest idea of how and when to correctly use them.

The only thing that makes me angrier than this right now is that Ohio is the _23rd_ state to adopt this kind of law.


----------



## Herdfan

> When stopped by police, a person will no longer have to "promptly inform" the officer that they're carrying a concealed handgun, though they will have to disclose that they have a concealed handgun when an officer asks them.




I travel to OH quite a bit and for years had no idea this was required.  Not a big deal to do it anyway.


----------



## ronntaylor

SuperMatt said:


> Perhaps it is hard for me to the side of this where you would follow somebody home after they left the scene, especially if you already got their license plate. I mean, whatever damage to your car, when the cops get there to file their report, the other driver can’t defend themselves, so you’re in a great position when it comes to insurance.



He/they were in a rage and out for revenge. The authorities are permitting vigilante justice. They're basically saying in the future that the first to shoot and kill is the party allowed to use SYG.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

SuperMatt said:


> Well, I strongly disagree. Perhaps if a group of angry bikers followed you home and harassed you, you’d see the other side of this. In the end, the law is to blame. Either party could have claimed “stand your ground” in this case. It’s beyond absurd when the law allowed a person to be followed home, then shot on their own property, and it’s excused by a “stand your ground” law. Following somebody for miles is not “standing your ground” at all.
> 
> Perhaps it is hard for me to understand the side of this where you would follow somebody home after they left the scene, especially if you already got their license plate. I mean, whatever damage to your car, when the cops get there to file their report, the other driver can’t defend themselves, so you’re in a great position when it comes to insurance.




If a group of angry bikers followed me home I sure wouldn’t leave the relative safety of my house to run outside and wave a gun around. I’d stay inside with the police on the phone until they arrived. If she didn’t have a gun and run outside with it she’d still be alive. Again, the police were already aware of the situation and she knew that. But because she owned a gun she felt emboldened to put herself at unnecessary risk, a lot greater risk then just staying in the house. I don’t even think most responsible gun owners would do that.

We all have biases and depending on the situation that favors that bias we could come to that same conclusion. If somebody shot one of those idiots that came out of their house armed just because a BLM march was going down their street I think there’s plenty of people who would see it as a threat that they brought on themselves. It’s not a big motion to go from holding a gun to pointing it at somebody, even by accident. Once it’s pointed at you, you have the right to fire in self defense.

I don’t get the mentality of following somebody home when they leave the scene of an accident either. Like I said in my original response, there were all kinds of steps in this situation where all involved should have stopped taking it further. It seems all involved had some level of irrationality throughout.


----------



## SuperMatt

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> If she didn’t have a gun and run outside with it she’d still be alive.



You do not know that for certain. Somebody angry enough to follow somebody home because the paint on their motorcycle got scratched has serious issues. And somebody being followed by a group of angry men on motorcycles is probably scared and also not acting rationally.

Again, the “stand your ground” and other lax gun laws in America are as much to blame as the person who pulled the trigger.

Finally, I take every single claim of the bikers with a grain of salt. They are the only LIVING witnesses to what happened. Did the woman point a gun at them? Or just show that she had it? Hmm... funny only the killer and his biker buddies are alive to tell the tale. Just like “she intentionally hit my bike.”

It seems MUCH more plausible to me that these guys were angry and acting out of rage than a pregnant librarian going postal. The killer should be locked up, period. The prosecutors are abdicating their responsibility and hiding behind the (admittedly terrible) stand your ground law.


----------



## Yoused

SuperMatt said:


> You do not know that for certain. Somebody angry enough to follow somebody home because the paint on their motorcycle got scratched has serious issues.




OK, even you have to concede that that is pretty weak. If she "scratched the paint" on his motorcycle, well, just think about that for a moment. There is really no way to scratch the paint on a bike without either hitting the rider or laying down the bike, neither of which is a minor thing.

Perhaps she merely rear-ended him, hit his back tire. That is still a very long way from ok. Compared to being in cars, bike riders are extremely vulnerable, and messing with them using tons of steel is all kinds of wrong. I mean, just think about how you felt the last time you _almost_ had an accident. Just a close call on a bike is terrifying/infuriating even if there is no contact. What a motorist sees as a litte oopsie a biker sees as a _holy shit!_ So please stop minimizing the initial encounter.



> Finally, I take every single claim of the bikers with a grain of salt. They are the only LIVING witnesses to what happened. Did the woman point a gun at them? Or just show that she had it?




Does it make any difference? If someone has a gun, why should another person be compelled to wait for it to be pointed at them? As far as I am concerned, if someone else has a gun in their hand, they are going to use it. I do not personally own, much less carry a gun, so my course of action is normally GTFOT.

Nobody was in the right in this incident, and the pregnant librarian is far from being an innocent victim. The biker should probably be charged with negligent use of a firearm rather than get off scot-free, but murder, no, not so much.


----------



## SuperMatt

Yoused said:


> OK, even you have to concede that that is pretty weak. If she "scratched the paint" on his motorcycle, well, just think about that for a moment. There is really no way to scratch the paint on a bike without either hitting the rider or laying down the bike, neither of which is a minor thing.
> 
> Perhaps she merely rear-ended him, hit his back tire. That is still a very long way from ok. Compared to being in cars, bike riders are extremely vulnerable, and messing with them using tons of steel is all kinds of wrong. I mean, just think about how you felt the last time you _almost_ had an accident. Just a close call on a bike is terrifying/infuriating even if there is no contact. What a motorist sees as a litte oopsie a biker sees as a _holy shit!_ So please stop minimizing the initial encounter.
> 
> 
> 
> Does it make any difference? If someone has a gun, why should another person be compelled to wait for it to be pointed at them? As far as I am concerned, if someone else has a gun in their hand, they are going to use it. I do not personally own, much less carry a gun, so my course of action is normally GTFOT.
> 
> Nobody was in the right in this incident, and the pregnant librarian is far from being an innocent victim. The biker should probably be charged with negligent use of a firearm rather than get off scot-free, but murder, no, not so much.



Following somebody home (uninvited) after a fender bender is never ok. The rider was not ejected from the bike. Nobody was injured. I don’t know if the paint was even scratched. If the killer had just moved on with his life, given a report to the cops, nobody would be dead. Period. And the cops would have gone to the woman’s house and dealt with the situation properly.

Don’t forget, the killer followed somebody, in anger, knowing he had a concealed weapon. The woman made some bad choices, but the killer’s blame is vastly more than hers for the death. This guy can go hang out with George Zimmerman and OJ Simpson and have a few drinks and a few laughs.


----------



## Herdfan

SuperMatt said:


> If the killer had just moved on with his life, given a report to the cops, nobody would be dead. Period.




And if she had waited for the Police at the scene, like the law required, no one would be dead either.  Period.

She may be the victim, but she is not innocent.


----------



## Huntn

Thomas Veil said:


> Well, I'm just so happy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine signs permitless concealed carry bill into law | CNN Politics
> 
> 
> Eligible adults in Ohio will soon be able to carry a concealed handgun without a license or training following legislation signed into law Monday night by Republican Gov. Mike DeWine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Constitution doesn't say you have to take Driver's Ed to drive a car, either, so I guess we'll just let everybody behind the wheel without knowing traffic laws or how to aim two tons of rolling metal and gasoline.
> 
> Cops, needless to say, are not big fans of this new law. Nor should they be.
> 
> But hey, on the positive side...more people will be running around, in our increasingly angry society, with lethal weapons on their person without even the slightest idea of how and when to correctly use them.
> 
> The only thing that makes me angrier than this right now is that Ohio is the _23rd_ state to adopt this kind of law.



STUPID is as STUPID does…


----------



## SuperMatt

Herdfan said:


> And if she had waited for the Police at the scene, like the law required, no one would be dead either.  Period.
> 
> She may be the victim, but she is not innocent.



Two wrongs DO make a right!  Well, at least for the killer who is happily sipping a beer right now while a pregnant mother is dead and an unborn baby never saw the light of day because of bullets he fired.

So much for the “pro-life” laws in Florida. It’s just the Wild West. What an utter disaster.


----------



## Huntn

SuperMatt said:


> Two wrongs DO make a right!  Well, at least for the killer who is happily sipping a beer right now while a pregnant mother is dead and an unborn baby never saw the light of day because of bullets he fired.
> 
> So much for the “pro-life” laws in Florida. It’s just the Wild West. What an utter disaster.



Selective pro-life:
I’m pro-life as long as I don’t have to pay anything to get it born, or after it’s born and have the discretion to end it because “I“ feel threatened or am told no.


----------



## Yoused

SuperMatt said:


> Two wrongs DO make a right!



Fact is, no one else is finding a bright line of wrong-person/right-person here. Both sides fucked up, and yes, it should have cost the biker.

It only takes a moment for you to make the wrong move that messes up the rest of your life. One little misstep and now you have to deal with the lasting consequences. I believe that all of us here (well, maybe not *Herdfan*) are of the opinion that greatly curtailing all the guns out there would go a long way toward making those consequences less severe.


----------



## Huntn

Yoused said:


> Fact is, no one else is finding a bright line of wrong-person/right-person here. Both sides fucked up, and yes, it should have cost the biker.
> 
> It only takes a moment for you to make the wrong move that messes up the rest of your life. One little misstep and now you have to deal with the lasting consequences. I believe that all of us here (well, maybe not *Herdfan*) are of the opinion that greatly curtailing all the guns out there would go a long way toward making those consequences less severe.



I like having access to a gun, but the consistent attempts to enable gun carrying in public is STUPID IMO along with enabling everyone to have a gun is ludicrous unless you have complete disregard for senseless death and collateral damage. The problem basically is I,Me,Mine> We, Our. That’s when “I felt” became a defacto Get Out Of Jail Free Card.

Remember when the police used to shout GUN?


----------



## Herdfan

SuperMatt said:


> Two wrongs DO make a right!  Well, at least for the killer who is happily sipping a beer right now while a pregnant mother is dead and an unborn baby never saw the light of day because of bullets he fired.
> 
> So much for the “pro-life” laws in Florida. It’s just the Wild West. What an utter disaster.




I agree it is a tragedy.  But also think she was as much in the wrong and is equally responsible for what happened.


----------



## SuperMatt

Herdfan said:


> I agree it is a tragedy.  But also think she was as much in the wrong and is equally responsible for what happened.



But you don’t know her side of the story. The only side of the story is from the killer and his two friends/witnesses. So you’re assuming he is telling the truth.

Dead men (or women) tell no tales. So consider that as you pronounce judgment on a dead person who never got their chance to say what they believe happened.

She didn’t kill anybody. He did. He is paying no penalty. She paid a death sentence.

You can believe whatever the F you want. But the evidence here is all from the killer and his friends’ perspective. The only thing we know from her side is that she feared for her life based on her 911 call.

She made bad choices that led to this, but she is NOT equally responsible. Especially since the murderer was hiding his gun until he was ready to kill her. He made no attempt to de-escalate or leave. He chose to kill. He is responsible.

“It’s a tragedy” is right up there with “thoughts and prayers.” It does nothing for anybody. These terrible laws need to be changed so killers don’t skate.


----------



## SuperMatt

Yoused said:


> Fact is, no one else is finding a bright line of wrong-person/right-person here. Both sides fucked up, and yes, it should have cost the biker.
> 
> It only takes a moment for you to make the wrong move that messes up the rest of your life. One little misstep and now you have to deal with the lasting consequences. I believe that all of us here (well, maybe not *Herdfan*) are of the opinion that greatly curtailing all the guns out there would go a long way toward making those consequences less severe.



You’ll never know her side. And the biker and his buddies have a VERY vested interest in presenting their story in a certain way.

But I agree that if we had some reasonable gun laws, this killing wouldn’t have even been possible.


----------



## Herdfan

SuperMatt said:


> But you don’t know her side of the story. The only side of the story is from the killer and his two friends/witnesses. So you’re assuming he is telling the truth.




I think the Police would have determined if she had in fact hit his motorcycle.  If there was no proof of that, the situation changes dramatically.


----------



## SuperMatt

Herdfan said:


> I think the Police would have determined if she had in fact hit his motorcycle.  If there was no proof of that, the situation changes dramatically.



If you get in a fender bender, that’s an excuse for following somebody home and harassing them? Not according the law in Florida nor any sense of common decency. Fleeing the scene is wrong, but following somebody home like that is worse.


----------



## Joe

She was an irresponsible gun owner, and she paid for it with her life. Someone like her should never own a gun.


----------



## SuperMatt

Joe said:


> She was an irresponsible gun owner, and she paid for it with her life. Someone like her should never own a gun.



She doesn’t anymore.

Do you think the killer was a responsible gun owner then? Or both of them were irresponsible?


----------



## Joe

SuperMatt said:


> She doesn’t anymore.
> 
> Do you think the killer was a responsible gun owner then? Or both of them were irresponsible?




He defended himself. She should have never came outside pointing a gun at them. Her life was not in danger when she was inside her home and they were outside waiting for the police to arrive. 

If that had happened to me I would have simply stayed inside my home until the police arrived.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

SuperMatt said:


> If you get in a fender bender, that’s an excuse for following somebody home and harassing them? Not according the law in Florida nor any sense of common decency. Fleeing the scene is wrong, but following somebody home like that is worse.





I agree it was wrong for them to follow her home.

But having said that, why are you assuming it was just a fender bender? They reported she intentionally hit them (which you are assuming is a lie, but I don’t know why anybody would call the police to lie about that…especially a “biker”). Before that happened it could have been an exchange between dueling hot heads on both sides.  The final showdown kind of points to that possibility. She could have also fled the scene because she didn’t want to be found guilty of something. I think a lot of assumptions are coming from the “biker vs pregnant librarian” angle, assumed they are thugs and she is an angel.


----------



## Joe

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> I agree it was wrong for them to follow her home.
> 
> But having said that, why are you assuming it was just a fender bender? They reported she intentionally hit them (which you are assuming is a lie, but I don’t know why anybody would call the police to lie about that…especially a “biker”). Before that happened it could have been an exchange between dueling hot heads on both sides.  The final showdown kind of points to that possibility. She could have also fled the scene because she didn’t want to be found guilty of something. I think a lot of assumptions are coming from the “biker vs pregnant librarian” angle, assumed they are thugs and she is an angel.




She's an innocent pregnant librarian and they are evil bikers lol


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Joe said:


> She's an innocent pregnant librarian and they are evil bikers lol




Maybe I’ve watched too much Sons of Anarchy, but I don’t think following and gunning down random women who cut them off is part of the acceptable biker code of ethics. Nor is getting the police involved in their disputes. I don’t recall any scenes at the clubhouse where they said “If anything goes sideways out there, you should first call the police. You’ve got nothing to hide.”


----------



## SuperMatt

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> I agree it was wrong for them to follow her home.
> 
> But having said that, why are you assuming it was just a fender bender? They reported she intentionally hit them (which you are assuming is a lie, but I don’t know why anybody would call the police to lie about that…especially a “biker”). Before that happened it could have been an exchange between dueling hot heads on both sides.  The final showdown kind of points to that possibility. She could have also fled the scene because she didn’t want to be found guilty of something. I think a lot of assumptions are coming from the “biker vs pregnant librarian” angle, assumed they are thugs and she is an angel.



He didn’t fall off the motorcycle, and had no injuries.

I believe there is no excuse for following somebody home because you’re mad about an accident that didn’t injure you and obviously didn’t render your vehicle inoperable.

People should not flee the scene, but one thing to consider: did she flee to avoid responsibility? Or did she receive threats from the man who eventually killed her? Again, as seen in many other cases, if you claim self defense and kill somebody, they don’t get a chance to testify. So we don’t know.

PS - I have nothing against bikers. I simply find way too many holes in the killer’s story.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

SuperMatt said:


> He didn’t fall off the motorcycle, and had no injuries.
> 
> I believe there is no excuse for following somebody home because you’re mad about an accident that didn’t injure you and obviously didn’t render your vehicle inoperable.
> 
> People should not flee the scene, but one thing to consider: did she flee to avoid responsibility? Or did she receive threats from the man who eventually killed her? Again, as seen in many other cases, if you claim self defense and kill somebody, they don’t get a chance to testify. So we don’t know.
> 
> PS - I have nothing against bikers. I simply find way too many holes in the killer’s story.




I think it is possible he did shoot her without her actually pointing the gun at them, but I also don't think she would have gotten shot if she didn't go outside with the gun.  That gave them an excuse.  Think of how many times cops shoot people with less justification and they are supposedly trained professionals.  

My main point of going down this rabbit hole is I think many other things could have reasonably been done by both sides before it ended up where it did, but once you bring guns into it, it may not matter what the law says when it comes to you still being alive at the end of it.


----------



## Herdfan

Huntn said:


> I like having access to a gun, but the consistent attempts to enable gun carrying in public is STUPID IMO along with enabling everyone to have a gun is ludicrous unless you have complete disregard for senseless death and collateral damage.




To me the gun issue is similar to the abortion issue in that neither side will ever be content.  Gun advocates want unfettered access while gun opponents want no one to have a gun.  There is simply no middle ground acceptable to the fringes of each issue and neither will be happy unless they get their way 100%.  So where does this leave the rest of the people.  Well a normal person who wants to own a gun will never accept what the anti-gun crowd wants, so they end up siding with the NRA or some other advocacy group even though they may go too far for their individual tastes.  But those who believe that people should be allowed to own guns, but want reasonable restrictions, won't go along with many of the things the NRA wants.

That is where I believe I am.  I have no issue with background checks or having to take the class and jump though a few hoops to get a carry permit.  But when the other option is to align myself with a group that wants to do completely away with my right to own a gun, there is no way I can support them.


----------



## SuperMatt

Herdfan said:


> To me the gun issue is similar to the abortion issue in that neither side will ever be content.  Gun advocates want unfettered access while gun opponents want no one to have a gun.  There is simply no middle ground acceptable to the fringes of each issue and neither will be happy unless they get their way 100%.  So where does this leave the rest of the people.  Well a normal person who wants to own a gun will never accept what the anti-gun crowd wants, so they end up siding with the NRA or some other advocacy group even though they may go too far for their individual tastes.  But those who believe that people should be allowed to own guns, but want reasonable restrictions, won't go along with many of the things the NRA wants.
> 
> That is where I believe I am.  I have no issue with background checks or having to take the class and jump though a few hoops to get a carry permit.  But when the other option is to align myself with a group that wants to do completely away with my right to own a gun, there is no way I can support them.



When people are surveyed on the individual issues, most gun owners support some restrictions, and most people on the other end of the spectrum actually believe guns should be allowed.

Unfortunately, the extreme outliers (which include the NRA on one side unfortunately) seem to get all the press. If the NRA supported some common-sense restrictions, they would be more in line with what their members actually believe.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

SuperMatt said:


> When people are surveyed on the individual issues, most gun owners support some restrictions, and most people on the other end of the spectrum actually believe guns should be allowed.
> 
> Unfortunately, the extreme outliers (which include the NRA on one side unfortunately) seem to get all the press. If the NRA supported some common-sense restrictions, they would be more in line with what their members actually believe.




Like most hyper polarized issues, they are only considered so because that's what the media labels them and only hands the mic to the extreme ends.  And I've said this before, if it's an issue that doesn't affect corporate profits the news media will always say it's the most important issue to Americans.  Everything that might cause a loss of profits is second tier (according to the media).


----------



## Huntn

Herdfan said:


> I agree it is a tragedy.  But also think she was as much in the wrong and is equally responsible for what happened.



If they did not have guns she’d be alive,


----------



## Huntn

Herdfan said:


> To me the gun issue is similar to the abortion issue in that neither side will ever be content.  Gun advocates want unfettered access while gun opponents want no one to have a gun.  There is simply no middle ground acceptable to the fringes of each issue and neither will be happy unless they get their way 100%.  So where does this leave the rest of the people.  Well a normal person who wants to own a gun will never accept what the anti-gun crowd wants, so they end up siding with the NRA or some other advocacy group even though they may go too far for their individual tastes.  But those who believe that people should be allowed to own guns, but want reasonable restrictions, won't go along with many of the things the NRA wants.
> 
> That is where I believe I am.  I have no issue with background checks or having to take the class and jump though a few hoops to get a carry permit.  But when the other option is to align myself with a group that wants to do completely away with my right to own a gun, there is no way I can support them.



Regarding gun opponents who want nobody having guns, they are a small minority, not representative of a vast majority of gun owners who want to see guns regulated. After all these are lethal weapons and there are enough ass  hats out there who have no business owning a gun,  they endanger and take lives senselessly.

The idea that everyone deserves a gun, is not a worthy right Imo, I mean shit you have to take a driving course, pass a test, are required to hold insurance, and renew periodically and those are not intended to be lethal. With guns we’ve got a full blown mania gun worship on our hands.


----------



## thekev

SuperMatt said:


> Here’s a sad (but 100% predictable) update to this story.
> 
> 
> 
> No charges to be filed in fatal shooting of Volusia library assistant
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I’m not a lawyer, but if the law truly "does not authorize the filing of any criminal charges," then the law is seriously f-ed up.






> Investigators said Morales then pointed her gun at Derr, who then drew his own handgun and shot Morales multiple times.





Hit and run followed by pointing a gun at the guy. This is pretty close to darwin award territory.


Note, if you try to hit someone with your car, that can be attempted murder, regardless of the outcome.



> Police say Derr and other witnesses followed Morales to the intersection of Highway 17-92 and Wisconsin Avenue, where they told Morales to stop and that law enforcement had been called.
> 
> “Is the motorcycle down on the ground?,” a dispatcher can be heard asking in 911 calls released by the Orange City Police Department Monday. “Is he breathing and conscious?”
> 
> “He’s fine ... the lady just took off and left,” the caller responds.


----------



## SuperMatt

thekev said:


> Hit and run followed by pointing a gun at the guy. This is pretty close to darwin award territory.
> 
> 
> Note, if you try to hit someone with your car, that can be attempted murder, regardless of the outcome.



Yes, according to the killer and the supposedly independent witnesses, (who followed her home too… yeah what unrelated bystander would ever follow somebody to their house after observing strangers in a minor accident with no injuries?) she did it on purpose. 

Not sure how this would qualify for a Darwin Award since the killer never said he had a weapon. 

She claimed that they were threatening and harassing her on her 911 call… so I thought other gun owners said before - if you are being threatened, especially on your own property, you have a right to get your gun to defend yourself. 

Sorry I just don’t believe quick draw McGraw is innocent. His behavior was absolutely unnecessary. If he let the police handle it instead of trying to mete out his own justice for a minor accident with no injuries, this never would have happened.


----------



## Joe

Sounds like she was the Quick Draw McGraw who pulled her gun out first. But she wasn’t fast enough  

Why are y’all not more upset at her for introducing a gun into this incident? Just surprising for anti gun people to give her a pass for pulling out a gun and then say he was “hiding” his. Lol 

This would have never happened and she’d be alive if she didn’t pull out a gun. 

Thoughts and prayers


----------



## SuperMatt

Joe said:


> Sounds like she was the Quick Draw McGraw who pulled her gun out first. But she wasn’t fast enough
> 
> Why are y’all not more upset at her for introducing a gun into this incident? Just surprising for anti gun people to give her a pass for pulling out a gun and then say he was “hiding” his. Lol
> 
> This would have never happened and she’d be alive if she didn’t pull out a gun.
> 
> Thoughts and prayers



Perhaps she’d still be alive if she hadn’t pulled out a gun. You cannot say that her “introducing a gun…” caused this. The killer had a gun on his person the entire time. He drove to somebody’s home, full of road rage, knowing he was hiding a gun.

If neither party had a gun, the police presumably would have arrived and handled it... and we wouldn’t even be talking about it. Maybe. I can’t say for sure.

Your statement that this never would have happened… is an assumption. You weren’t there, and don’t know what the killer might have done if she simply cowered in fear from their harassment in her home. Maybe they would burn it down. They were clearly acting irrationally, since they followed somebody home after a minor accident with no injuries and the cops on the way to take a report. You’re entitled to make that statement, but the fact is you don’t know what would have happened.


----------



## Joe

SuperMatt said:


> Perhaps she’d still be alive if she hadn’t pulled out a gun. You cannot say that her “introducing a gun…” caused this. The killer had a gun on his person the entire time. He drove to somebody’s home, full of road rage, knowing he was hiding a gun.
> 
> If neither party had a gun, the police presumably would have arrived and handled it... and we wouldn’t even be talking about it. Maybe. I can’t say for sure.
> 
> Your statement that this never would have happened… is an assumption. You weren’t there, and don’t know what the killer might have done if she simply cowered in fear from their harassment in her home. Maybe they would burn it down. They were clearly acting irrationally, since they followed somebody home after a minor accident with no injuries and the cops on the way to take a report. You’re entitled to make that statement, but the fact is you don’t know what would have happened.




You have made a lot of assumptions on this case as well. You weren't there either. None of us were there.  

Her introducing a gun definitely caused this. You yourself have said the biker had a gun on himself the entire time....hidden. You know what that means right? He wasn't threatening her with his gun if it was hidden and she didn't know he had one. He didn't pull out his gun until she had hers pointed at him. His gun was concealed. You keep saying he was hiding his gun like it's a bad thing. Lots of people conceal their weapons. It doesn't mean they're hiding it and out to get you.


----------



## Huntn

Joe said:


> Sounds like she was the Quick Draw McGraw who pulled her gun out first. But she wasn’t fast enough
> 
> Why are y’all not more upset at her for introducing a gun into this incident? Just surprising for anti gun people to give her a pass for pulling out a gun and then say he was “hiding” his. Lol
> 
> This would have never happened and she’d be alive if she didn’t pull out a gun.
> 
> Thoughts and prayers



Your logic does not quite add up Imo, no offense.  Guns were in the middle of all this. It’s as simple as asking what would have happened if no guns were available? See my post:

Post in thread '17 Year-old Blue Lives Matter Activist with AR 15 Charged With Murder After Two Killed at Protest'
https://talkedabout.com/threads/17-...er-after-two-killed-at-protest.181/post-94585


----------



## Joe

Huntn said:


> Your logic does not quite add up Imo, no offense.  Guns were in the middle of all this. It’s as simple as asking what would have happened if no guns were available? See my post:
> 
> Post in thread '17 Year-old Blue Lives Matter Activist with AR 15 Charged With Murder After Two Killed at Protest'
> https://talkedabout.com/threads/17-...er-after-two-killed-at-protest.181/post-94585




Yes, guns were in the middle of all of this. I agree. But some keep blaming the biker and not the woman that pulled the gun first. That’s the whole issue.


----------



## SuperMatt

Joe said:


> Yes, guns were in the middle of all of this. I agree. But some keep blaming the biker and not the woman that pulled the gun first. That’s the whole issue.



People blame the person who actually killed somebody. Because they killed somebody. It may have been justifiable “in the moment.” However, that moment never happens if you don’t follow a stranger home after a minor accident. Guns aside, that is a baffling part of all this. Don’t people have better things to do? Even if you could use the excuse of “I didn’t copy down their license plate…” why didn’t they simply note the person’s address after she got to her house and leave her alone?

You do not have a right to follow somebody like that and harass them at their home. If no guns were involved, would anybody excuse chasing a person home after a minor accident and harassing them? I don’t think so.

Kyle Rittenhouse used a similar defense: “in the moment” he had to defend himself. But his actions directly led to the “moment” in which force was necessary. Yes, in his case (and this one), the victim took unwise actions, but the situation was created and/or escalated by the killer in both cases.

It’s possible the killer truly did fear for his life at the instant he saw the gun. It’s also possible the deceased woman feared for her life when she was followed home by 3 strangers who were yelling at her. If she had shot him dead, she probably could have claimed self defense too.

Everybody should get rid of their guns, IMO. The amount of lives saved by guns is DWARFED by the number of lives lost. The woman probably would be alive if she didn’t have a gun, although there’s no way to know for sure. What is wrong is that the law seems to be all about a moment, and not about the actions of a killer that led to such a moment.


----------



## Yoused

SuperMatt said:


> However, that moment never happens if you don’t follow a stranger home after a minor accident.



You keep calling it a "minor accident". That characterization seems to be completely wrong. We have accounts that suggest that it might not have been an _accident_ at all but an intentional collision. The accounts may be biased, but they seem to be all we have to go on.

On top of that, it was clearly not "minor", inasmuch as _they followed her home_. If it had truly been a minor thing, she might not have fled, and/or they might not have pursued.

Of course, there was a lot of hot stupid here, and, well, having guns around high tempers is a bad thing – though, the same can often be said about cars.


----------



## SuperMatt

Yoused said:


> You keep calling it a "minor accident". That characterization seems to be completely wrong. We have accounts that suggest that it might not have been an _accident_ at all but an intentional collision. The accounts may be biased, but they seem to be all we have to go on.
> 
> On top of that, it was clearly not "minor", inasmuch as _they followed her home_. If it had truly been a minor thing, she might not have fled, and/or they might not have pursued.
> 
> Of course, there was a lot of hot stupid here, and, well, having guns around high tempers is a bad thing – though, the same can often be said about cars.



The police called it a “minor crash” and stated that he was not injured and did not fall off his motorcycle. He vastly overreacted. My guess is that his response scared her into driving off.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1462903788558295047/

Also, why did the 911 operator fail to tell them NOT to follow the woman’s car?


----------



## SuperMatt

A bit more detail about the case and decision not to prosecute.









						Prosecutors: No charges against man who shot and killed Volusia library assistant
					

Andrew Derr, of Orange City, shot and killed Volusia library assistant Sara-Nicole Morales, who was armed with a gun, after a road rage incident.



					www.news-journalonline.com
				






> The incident began when Derr tried to pass Morales and she moved her car into his lane, causing Derr to swerve, according to a witness' statement in a report.
> 
> Derr then "became aggressive," yelling and waving as he continued to ride next to Morales' vehicle, the witness said in the report.
> 
> Morales swerved her car at the biker, the report said. Her vehicle struck the motorcycle's saddle bag, leaving a scuff mark and almost causing the biker to wreck, according to the report.
> 
> Derr then kicked Morales' car, a witness stated in the report.



Hmm, becoming a bit more clear why a woman might not want to wait around at an accident scene to see what Mr. road rage would do next.

Pulling out a gun when she got home was a big mistake, but leaving the scene looks like it was done for her self-preservation.

Again, he clearly escalated this and just like Rittenhouse, bears some responsibility for what he did… but gets away with it.


----------



## Yoused

SuperMatt said:


> Hmm, becoming a bit more clear why a woman might not want to wait around at an accident scene to see what Mr. road rage would do next.




OK, I will make this as clear as possible.

I have not ridden a motorcycle, and it sounds like you have not either. However, I _have_ ridden a bicycle on the streets. For about a decade, my bike _was_ my car, because, reasons. In that respect, I can empathize with motorcyclists.

When you are on two wheels, all those four wheeled vehicles are big stupid deathboxes. It does not matter if the driver has a PhD in physics or won the Nobel Peace Prize, as a motorist they are stupid assholes, and even when they try to be decent it often turns out poorly.

This is where the biker was coming from. The driver of the 1.5 ton deathbox tried to kill him. That is what he and his friends saw. It really does not matter whether she was being hostile or just inconsiderate, when someone else hangs your life out on a string, it is not _mildly_ upsetting.

In truth, her sloppy/aggressive driving in this case was _exactly like mishandling a gun_. You cannot just brush it off with a "she was scared" – how do you think the biker felt when she tried to lay him down, "meh"? This cannot be overstated. Drivers tool about in their safe little universes with almost no understanding of what is going on outside of those universes. I know this, because I have seen it from both sides.

Again, the gun part made the whole situation worse, but she had already called for help and really should have stayed in the house.


----------



## SuperMatt

Another life lost to gun violence…

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1505221559870496769/

She was leaving a restaurant and got caught in a crossfire from a gunfight.


----------



## Yoused

Premier Shooting gun range in West Chester Twp. permitted for liquor sales
					

The West Chester Twp. trustees recently sanctioned a liquor license for Premier Shooting & Training Center after the police chief gave assurances all safety precautions are being taken as the popular gun range plans to expand.




					www.journal-news.com
				




What could possibly go wrong?


----------



## Herdfan

Yoused said:


> I have not ridden a motorcycle, and it sounds like you have not either. However, I _have_ ridden a bicycle on the streets. For about a decade, my bike _was_ my car, because, reasons. In that respect, I can empathize with motorcyclists.
> 
> When you are on two wheels, all those four wheeled vehicles are big stupid deathboxes. It does not matter if the driver has a PhD in physics or won the Nobel Peace Prize, as a motorist they are stupid assholes, and even when they try to be decent it often turns out poorly.




And that is the reason I sold my bike and stopped riding 25+ years ago.  Having to be hyper-aware of everything around you was taking the enjoyment away from it.  And it wasn't only vehicles, but road hazards like tar snakes and even where someone has mowed their grass into the road.  Cars don't have to be aware of those things, motorcycles do.

So I do agree that a car, even if it just swerved at you and didn't hit you could set someone off.


----------



## SuperMatt

People that choose to ride motorcycles know the risk they are taking. Using that risk as a reason to hate all other drivers to the point of excusing violence against them? Sorry, they take the risk; it’s their issue.

I have friends who ride and my uncle used to ride. They never behaved like the killer in this tragedy.

There is no excuse for his behavior. If people driving badly sets you off to the point of violence, you should not ride a motorcycle, and you should DEFINITELY not carry a firearm.


----------



## ronntaylor

SuperMatt said:


> People that choose to ride motorcycles know the risk they are taking. Using that risk as a reason to hate all other drivers to the point of excusing violence against them? Sorry, they take the risk; it’s their issue.
> 
> I have friends who ride and my uncle used to ride. They never behaved like the killer in this tragedy.
> 
> There is no excuse for his behavior. If people driving badly sets you off to the point of violence, you should not ride a motorcycle, and you should DEFINITELY not carry a firearm.



I witness bad driving almost every time I'm on a highway or large roads. But TBH, I'm more likely to see bad driving & behavior from bikers (motorcyclists and bicyclists). From weaving in and out of stalled traffic. Abrupt lane changes. Surrounding cars. And definitely antagonizing others (vehicles). I can't remember all of this story, so don't recall if there's any video. The killer said she intentionally drove into his lane and bike. Is there any proof beyond his words? She obviously can't tell her side of the story. He appears to be a hothead and this road rage incident took a deadly turn.


----------



## SuperMatt

ronntaylor said:


> I witness bad driving almost every time I'm on a highway or large roads. But TBH, I'm more likely to see bad driving & behavior from bikers (motorcyclists and bicyclists). From weaving in and out of stalled traffic. Abrupt lane changes. Surrounding cars. And definitely antagonizing others (vehicles). I can't remember all of this story, so don't recall if there's any video. The killer said she intentionally drove into his lane and bike. Is there any proof beyond his words? She obviously can't tell her side of the story. He appears to be a hothead and this road rage incident took a deadly turn.



A guy on a Vespa (or similar… didn’t check) hit my car trying to squeeze by it while I was stopped at a light 2 days ago.  Only hit my side-view mirror, and didn’t damage it, and he took a moment to straighten my mirror back out which was nice. I decided not to scream at him or follow him home.


----------



## Joe

SuperMatt said:


> People that choose to ride motorcycles know the risk they are taking. Using that risk as a reason to hate all other drivers to the point of excusing violence against them? Sorry, they take the risk; it’s their issue.
> 
> I have friends who ride and my uncle used to ride. They never behaved like the killer in this tragedy.
> 
> There is no excuse for his behavior. If people driving badly sets you off to the point of violence, you should not ride a motorcycle, and you should DEFINITELY not carry a firearm.




The only person that was violent was the woman that was killed. She intentionally tried to hit him with her vehicle and she intentionally pulled a gun on him. 

She should have never owned a firearm with that temper.


----------



## Yoused

this is sure helpful









						3 Army soldiers, 9 others accused in gun trafficking ring
					

The indictment charges the group with conspiring to violate federal firearms laws, among other crimes. If convicted, the defendants face up to 20 years in prison.




					www.kwqc.com


----------



## Yoused

Could have gone into FloridaMan, but I found this thread first.

_We should try out this bulletproof vest, see if'n it works_









						16-year-old killed when teens wearing body armor take turns shooting each other in Florida, police say
					

A 16-year-old boy was killed when he and another teen took turns shooting at each other while wearing a form of body armor, according to police.




					www.clickorlando.com


----------



## Huntn

Yoused said:


> Could have gone into FloridaMan, but I found this thread first.
> 
> _We should try out this bulletproof vest, see if'n it works_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 16-year-old killed when teens wearing body armor take turns shooting each other in Florida, police say
> 
> 
> A 16-year-old boy was killed when he and another teen took turns shooting at each other while wearing a form of body armor, according to police.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.clickorlando.com



Where is the Darwin Award thread??


----------



## ronntaylor

JFC! Can't imagine his pain









						Coroner arrives at scene to find bodies of his parents and son at Georgia shooting range: report
					

“Let’s keep Richard Hawk and Family in our prayers,” the Grantville Police Department said in a statement Saturday.




					www.nydailynews.com


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

What we know about the increase in U.S. murders in 2020
					

The U.S. murder rate rose 30% between 2019 and 2020 – the largest single-year increase in more than a century.




					www.pewresearch.org
				




Highest increase in gun murders in over a 100 years happened under a Republican President.  Hm.

Highest rate increase happened in Republican states.  Hm. 

Republicans "Hey, we just inspire and promote gun violence.  It's the Democrats' fault for not stopping it."


----------



## Huntn

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> What we know about the increase in U.S. murders in 2020
> 
> 
> The U.S. murder rate rose 30% between 2019 and 2020 – the largest single-year increase in more than a century.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.pewresearch.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Highest increase in gun murders in over a 100 years happened under a Republican President.  Hm.
> 
> Highest rate increase happened in Republican states.  Hm.
> 
> Republicans "Hey, we just inspire and promote gun violence.  It's the Democrats' fault for not stopping it."



Hmm, more guns, more murder, this is not advanced math. STUPID plays a huge roll in this and of course _My selfish misplaced_ _Libertay!!, besides that  _just what is the agenda here? I’ll say herding the sheep.


----------



## SuperMatt

Huntn said:


> Hmm, more guns, more murder, this is not advanced math. STUPID plays a huge roll in this and of course _My selfish misplaced_ _Libertay!!, besides that  _just what is the agenda here? I’ll say herding the sheep.



It doesn’t help that a large majority of the Supreme Court has a slavish adherence to dogma when it comes to interpreting the Constitution. The whole point of being a judge or justice is to sometimes see that a strict fundamentalist interpretation of something can harm society at large. It’s the same idea when a judge has discretion to increase or decrease a sentence on a criminal based on mitigating circumstances.

This Supreme Court majority clearly doesn’t care anything for the effects of their actions. Unlimited money in politics, thousands of roadblocks to voting (including racial gerrymandering), women going to jail for taking an abortion pill... ALL of this is happening because of the Roberts Court’s actions over the past decade. They should consider the meaning of their title.


----------



## ronntaylor

Texas man, 70, fatally shoots neighbor after dog runs into his yard, officials say
					

After the shooting, witnesses said Eric Lee Elliott put his gun in his truck and continued doing yardwork as if nothing had happened, according to the Liberty County Sheriff’s Office.




					www.nbcnews.com
				






> The suspect, Eric Lee Elliott, 70, and William Duncan Womack, 60, had an ongoing dispute between them over Womack's dog running loose in the neighborhood, the Liberty County Sheriff’s Office said in a news release.


----------



## ronntaylor

Another fine gun nut exercising his free-dumb





__





						Suspect Arrested, Charged in Fatal Shooting at 7545 Martin Luther King Boulevard – City of Houston | Newsroom
					





					cityofhouston.news
				






> A preliminary investigation indicated *the victim attempted to shoplift* from the store but was confronted by store employees, one of them Batres.  Batres and the victim then got into a physical altercation.  Further investigation determined *the victim had his back toward Batres, who then pulled out a pistol and shot the victim several times.*




*ADDED: online commentary about this murder is brutal -- *_"it's a right-wing wet dream to be able to shoot a person"_


----------



## Yoused

Firearms were the leading cause of death for people/children under age 19 in the US in 2020, surpassing automobile fatalities for the first time, by more than 10%. Some of that count includes suicides, but most of it was some form of homicide. Rising to a distant 3rd place among young people were ODs/poisonings (laundry pods, anyone?).


----------



## JayMysteri0

Uh, unless you are in a videogame, ....why?

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1517634253101494272/


----------



## Yoused

JayMysteri0 said:


> Uh, unless you are in a videogame, ....why?
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1517634253101494272/



Obviously he is in the kitchen: that thing be is about to eat, it might not be dead yet.


----------



## Herdfan

If you ever wonder why the pro-gun advocates don't respect these anti-gun advocates, there is this:





If you don't understand, look closer.


----------



## Yoused

Herdfan said:


> If you ever wonder why the pro-gun advocates don't respect these anti-gun advocates, there is this:
> 
> View attachment 13574
> 
> If you don't understand, look closer.




It is worth noting that the poster is not from this country (Pádraig is te Gaelic spelling of Patrick). I personally am not familiar with how the shelves in UK 6 & Bob stores are stocked, but it seems entirely likely that even air rifles are not set out in the open like that. And quite frankly, stocking them in the open like that merely serves to normalize and promote American gun culture much more than it needs to be. Your pedantic little position is a weak one.


----------



## Herdfan

Yoused said:


> It is worth noting that the poster is not from this country (Pádraig is te Gaelic spelling of Patrick). I personally am not familiar with how the shelves in UK 6 & Bob stores are stocked, but it seems entirely likely that even air rifles are not set out in the open like that. And quite frankly, stocking them in the open like that merely serves to normalize and promote American gun culture much more than it needs to be. Your pedantic little position is a weak one.



They are not out in the open.  They are behind glass.


----------



## Joe

ronntaylor said:


> Texas man, 70, fatally shoots neighbor after dog runs into his yard, officials say
> 
> 
> After the shooting, witnesses said Eric Lee Elliott put his gun in his truck and continued doing yardwork as if nothing had happened, according to the Liberty County Sheriff’s Office.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nbcnews.com




 Charged with murder...idiot. #ThoughtsAndPrayers


----------



## Joe

JayMysteri0 said:


> Uh, unless you are in a videogame, ....why?
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1517634253101494272/




That's just a nut bag.


----------



## ronntaylor

Sue them out of existence. Make life hard for them. There can be no excuse for such absolute irresponsible acts









						6 Gun Shops, 11,000 ‘Crime Guns’: A Rare Peek at the Pipeline
					

In Philadelphia, the most comprehensive study in decades found a handful of dealers selling a huge number of guns used illegally. A House panel is uncovering similar patterns elsewhere.




					www.nytimes.com
				






> The report’s conclusions confirm what law enforcement officials have long known. *A small percentage of gun stores — 1.2 percent* of the state’s licensed dealers, according to Brady — *accounted for 57 percent of firearms that ended up in the hands of criminals* through illegal resale or direct purchases by “straw” buyers who turned them over to people barred from owning guns.


----------



## SuperMatt

ronntaylor said:


> Sue them out of existence. Make life hard for them. There can be no excuse for such absolute irresponsible acts
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 6 Gun Shops, 11,000 ‘Crime Guns’: A Rare Peek at the Pipeline
> 
> 
> In Philadelphia, the most comprehensive study in decades found a handful of dealers selling a huge number of guns used illegally. A House panel is uncovering similar patterns elsewhere.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com



Thanks for that article... I saw this info about the gun lobby. It reminds me exactly what the NRA is all about (hint: they don’t care about gun owners, they care about gun makers and sellers):



> Twenty years ago, the gun lobby pushed an amendment through Congress preventing the A.T.F. from distributing trace data beyond law enforcement agencies. That means even basic numbers are hard to come by. When Ms. Maloney’s staff requested granular information about dealers with high numbers of crime gun sales, the A.T.F. refused to identify retailers by name — giving each an anonymized numeric label.




Because what we need is LESS information about gun sales. They’ve made it super-easy for criminals to get guns now.


----------



## Herdfan

ronntaylor said:


> Sue them out of existence. Make life hard for them. There can be no excuse for such absolute irresponsible acts




Screw just suing them.  Put the shop owners in jail for a long time.


----------



## Yoused

Footnote that does not merit its own thread, the guy who served as a symbol for RW "survivalists" and ammosexuals after shooting it out with some FBI agents has ceased to survive. The Ruby Ridge incident was placed alongside the Branch Davidian showdown as motivation for things like Columbine and the Oklahoma City bombing.


----------



## SuperMatt

This is very sad for me. At least 10 people have been killed in a mass shooting in Buffalo at Tops Friendly Markets…









						10 dead in Buffalo supermarket attack police call hate crime
					

BUFFALO, N.Y. (AP) — A white 18-year-old wearing military gear and livestreaming with a helmet camera opened fire with a rifle at a supermarket in Buffalo, killing 10 people and wounding three others Saturday in what authorities described as “racially motivated violent extremism.”




					apnews.com
				




Even worse, the Tops is in a predominantly black neighborhood and the white shooter turns out to have a manifesto. The manifesto discusses “great replacement theory” which is talked about all the time by Tucker Carlson.


----------



## Deleted member 215

Is there a source on that manifesto? It's not in the article you linked.

Although I wouldn't find it hard to believe if true, I want to make sure this information is accurate.


----------



## SuperMatt

TBL said:


> Is there a source on that manifesto? It's not in the article you linked.
> 
> Although I wouldn't find it hard to believe if true, I want to make sure this information is accurate.



Found it on Reddit… but here’s something called BNO news.









						Gunman kills 10 at New York store while livestreaming on Twitch
					

A man has opened fire at a supermarket in Buffalo, New York while live-streaming on Twitch, killing at least 10 people and injuring several others, local officials and witnesses say. He also posted an online manifesto in which he described himself as a white supremacist. The incident happened at...




					bnonews.com
				




And he was livestreaming it on Twitch.


----------



## SuperMatt

I am watching the news conference now. They confirmed that the killings were racially motivated and that all but 2 people that were shot are black.


----------



## Deleted member 215

The sad thing is that the only right-wing response to this will be that it was actually an Antifa false-flag designed to make white people look bad. And no, that isn't a joke. I genuinely expect that response. There will be no accountability for the way that their "great replacement theory" bullshit is actually leading to murder.


----------



## Yoused

TBL said:


> The sad thing is that the only right-wing response to this will be that it was actually an Antifa false-flag




Well. and, the ever popular "t & p".


----------



## SuperMatt

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1525617239226843136/

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1525596703377719303/


----------



## SuperMatt

Also, for the NRA dirtbags that will say “we need good guys with guns…” There was an armed security guard that fired shots but the racist terrorist was wearing body armor.


----------



## Citysnaps

SuperMatt said:


> Also, for the NRA dirtbags that will say “we need good guys with guns…” There was an armed security guard that fired shots but the racist terrorist was wearing body armor.




And sadly, the security guard was killed.  Every sheriff and police chief I've heard talk on the subject of "good guys with guns" is that under high pressure and extremely tense situations with adrenalin pumping they often can't tell the difference between a good guy with a gun and a bad guy with a gun.


----------



## SuperMatt

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1525611272007565318/


----------



## GermanSuplex

This sicko will have defenders in the GOP.


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1525599573472837636/
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1525603845602172928/

Why is it so called supremacists show you how they are some of the most mentally deficient MFers supposedly walking upright?

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1525605943588933633/

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1525609425125482496/

But hey, let's make sure after our "thoughts & prayers" we blame it on mental heath.   Again...

Let's try something different and blame it on fucking evil, and evil has easy access to the means to carry out their shit.


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1525583343932297219/

No hair splitting, no semantics.  Just get our priorities straight.


----------



## SuperMatt

JayMysteri0 said:


> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1525599573472837636/
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1525603845602172928/
> 
> Why is it so called supremacists show you how they are some of the most mentally deficient MFers supposedly walking upright?
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1525605943588933633/
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1525609425125482496/
> 
> But hey, let's make sure after our "thoughts & prayers" we blame it on mental heath.   Again...
> 
> Let's try something different and blame it on fucking evil, and evil has easy access to the means to carry out their shit.



And… he didn’t even plead guilty in court as he said he would.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1525618242739388421/

Sorry - linking more posts in that thread not working for me atm… but click to see the whole thread…


----------



## SuperMatt

‘He Saved Some Lives’: Cop-Turned-Guard Killed in Battle With Buffalo Gunman
					

Courtesy Aaron Salter, IIILOCKPORT, New York—After serving as a Buffalo police officer for 30 years, Aaron Salter Jr. spent the last four working as a security guard at the Tops Friendly Markets store on the east side of the city.That’s where he was Saturday afternoon when a gunman stalked in...




					finance.yahoo.com
				






> LOCKPORT, New York—After serving as a Buffalo police officer for 30 years, Aaron Salter Jr. spent the last four working as a security guard at the Tops Friendly Markets store on the east side of the city.
> 
> That’s where he was Saturday afternoon when a gunman stalked in with a military-style assault rifle in his hands and hate in his heart and opened fire.
> 
> Authorities said Salter acted like the cop he was: He pulled out his weapon and tried to take down the gunman, whom police have identified as 18-year-old Payton Gendron.
> 
> But Gendron was wearing body armor and Salter’s bullets couldn’t pierce it. Instead, police say the assailant returned fire and killed Salter—whose family was mourning a man city officials said was an undeniable “hero” on a horrific day.


----------



## JayMysteri0

I think what also annoys me is that the shooter is do a trial by a 'jury of his peers'.

The shooter specifically choose an area that is heavily Black, I'm thinking he better be tried there as well.

Then locked up and left to show how "superior" he is without guns.


----------



## Cmaier

JayMysteri0 said:


> I think what also annoys me is that the shooter is do a trial by a 'jury of his peers'.
> 
> The shooter specifically choose an area that is heavily Black, I'm thinking he better be tried there as well.
> 
> Then locked up and left to show how "superior" he is without guns.




The rule of thumb is you are tried in the jurisdiction where you committed the crime, so long as you can get a fair trial there.  Generally speaking, it is pretty rare that venue is moved.  It’s hard to show that you can’t get a fair trial.  That said, this sort of case, where there is a ton of press, is the sort of case where it happens more often. Still a small percentage of the time, though.


----------



## Yoused

_*Antifa False Flag Operation!*_​


----------



## JayMysteri0

Cmaier said:


> The rule of thumb is you are tried in the jurisdiction where you committed the crime, so long as you can get a fair trial there.  Generally speaking, it is pretty rare that venue is moved.  It’s hard to show that you can’t get a fair trial.  That said, this sort of case, where there is a ton of press, is the sort of case where it happens more often. Still a small percentage of the time, though.



Yes, we know that.

We also know full well one of the first things a lawyer will do for any advantage is request a change of venue.  If there's even the slightest or imagined belief it may help the prosecution.  Because they have to do anything they can for their client.

As I pointed out though with the shooter's stated motivations, one could hope ( _for emotional reasons_ ) the shooter gets a jury of those he considered _inferior _& see how that _superiority_ works out for him.


----------



## JayMysteri0

This is what _superiority_ looks like.  Needing body armor, firearms, and surprise to do this...

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1525685844635533315/
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1525806416879095808/
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1525604413456453632/
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1525647969118191618/
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1525616051609866241/


----------



## DT

I'm not going to like the individual posts on the Buffalo mass shooting, just say thanks to @SuperMatt  and especially @JayMysteri0  for all their contributions on the topic, from the initial report to some really thought provoking follow up.

I can't add much, it's a goddam tragedy of guns + racism.  People were killed, people, mothers, fathers, grandmothers, because this ignorant, hate filled motherf****er acted on some idiotic right wing nonsense that ultimately was about  the colors of a person's skin __and__ had the ability to act because he was able to buy assault weapons and tactical gear.  And if someone corrects my use of the term "assault weapon", here's a nice big FUCK YOU in advance.

I only hope this cowardly dirtbag gets judged by a jury of Black Americans, and he gets what's coming to him in prison.


----------



## JayMysteri0

The inspiration
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1525635226415808513/


----------



## JayMysteri0

A little about the area

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1525869099322069000/
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1525873498417205248/

The asshole travelled 200 miles to kill people who NEVER bothered him, who were trying to get on with their lives.

Something to remember when reading up on this latest racist shooter.  Michael Brown *killed* in Ferguson by a cop, is a Black ( _yes, it actually even says that in wikipedia_ ) man.  This k*iller* of ten people is a White teenager.  Handy when you go to court, dress you up in a suit, and have you slobber on the stand pretending you cared you shot people in a different town you travelled to.  Sound koffrittenhousekoff familiar?
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1525851085461766144/
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1525859585868931072/


----------



## Yoused

Yoused said:


> _*Antifa False Flag Operation!*_​



aaaaannndd ...









						Racist Republican Lawmaker Claims White Supremacist Buffalo Shooting Was False Flag
					

After an 18-year-old uploaded a racist manifesto before targeting Black people in a mass shooting, the shooter’s fellow racists are scrambling to obfuscate the truth




					www.rollingstone.com
				




"Oath Keepers" fan, naturally.


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1525852197468217344/


https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1525876470647861248/


----------



## DT

JayMysteri0 said:


> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1525876470647861248/




Saw this this morning, those parents are some sick fucks.


----------



## DT

This happened this weekend too, could've been much worse ...










						At least 1 dead and 5 wounded in shooting at California church
					

At least one person is dead and five wounded -- including four who are critically injured -- after a shooting Sunday at a church in Laguna Woods, California, the sheriff's department said.




					www.cnn.com


----------



## DT

Wow, there's just not enough FUCK YOUs to go around ...










						Buffalo shooting "false flag" operation, suggest Wendy Rogers, Nick Fuentes
					

Arizona state Senator Wendy Rogers, who is endorsed by former President Trump for reelection, said Saturday that the shooting is the start of "fed boy summer."




					www.newsweek.com


----------



## JayMysteri0

So the desperation today on social media over the Buffalo shooter since the false flag thing isn't catching on, ...is to blame Rachel Maddow?   

Stay with me here.  Since the shooter in his own manifesto parroted Tucker Carlson, people have made the association of the shooter being inspired by Carlson.  So the new reach / deflection is the shooter that shot at Steve Scalise said how much he loves Rachel Maddow, ...THUS it must be Rachel Maddow's fault it happened.  If you are NOT willing to say that, then Carlson had nothing to do with the shooter that paraphrased him, and... whatever else SOME people need to distance themselves from the shooter.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1525970954672807936/
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1526213747886460929/

You can just search her and it opens this rabbit hole of denial, and posts about her pointing out how stalking has been a regular thing with the nuttier GOP fans.

The distancing from the Buffalo shooter seems to have really caught some who got very casual with shit like the GRT, by surprise.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1526215945349390337/

What I want to know is why a fear of immigrants replacing White voters, leads to shooting Black people who've had a history of suffering voter suppression?  THAT literally makes ZERO F' ing sense.
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1526205871646248961/

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1525871688952401920/


----------



## Joe

They're good at that game. And the crazy part is that they get a whole bunch of people to believe them. They had people blaming AOC for our power grid problems in Texas. They had people cheering Ted Cruz fleeing to Cancun during the freeze and talking shit about AOC flying to Texas to volunteer and help during the freeze. I'm dead serious. Conservatives in this state who were freezing for several days were like "Ted deserves a vacation" LMAO


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

How this man's ugly race-war fantasies led to the Buffalo massacre
					

He feeds on white rage — it got him elected president. At this point, the horror in Buffalo isn't even surprising




					www.salon.com
				





_*He will be described as a "lone wolf" who "acted alone.*"_ In important respects, this is misleading. Whether or not Gendron had personal contact with other right-wing fanatics, he is part of a global white supremacist project that includes the Trump movement and the Republican Party.
_*His actions will be attributed to "mental illness.*"_ In fact, in Gendron's manifesto he makes clear that he knows what he is doing and why. He clearly articulates the motivations, reasoning and planning involved in his act of anti-Black terrorism. Of course, the vast majority of people with mental illnesses are not violent.
_*The Buffalo attack is "shocking."*_ This is an absurd reaction. The Buffalo attack was wholly predictable and is the obvious result of an American neofascist ideology that has taken control of the Republican Party and much of the right-wing media and "conservative" movement.
_*"A good guy with a gun can stop a bad guy with a gun."*_ This is an appeal to the disproved claim that more guns equals less crime. There was an armed security guard at the supermarket in Buffalo. He shot Gendron several times without seriously injuring him. Gendron's body armor stopped the bullets. The brave guard, whose name was Aaron Salter Jr., was then shot and killed by Gendron.
_*It is too soon to talk about what happened. We must wait for the facts*_*. *The facts about what happened in Buffalo on Saturday are self-evident. A white man drove hundreds of miles to kill Black people because he believed they and other nonwhites, as directed by an imaginary global Jewish cabal, were "taking away" what he believed what "his country." 
_*We must not politicize mass shootings. This is a tragedy: We send thoughts and prayers. *_Gun violence is a public safety issue. White supremacy is a public safety issue, as well as a national security issue. The same is true of domestic terrorism. It is the responsibility of a government to keep its citizens safe. These are inherently political matters.
The mainstream news media has already begun pivoting to a narrative of "healing" and "hope" in the aftermath of the Buffalo attack. That too is part of a long history in which the suffering and pain of Black and brown people is minimized so as not to injure the sensibilities and feelings of white society. Moreover, minimizing that suffering also serves to negate Black and brown people's demands for justice and equal treatment.


----------



## AG_PhamD

A very tragic and disturbing situation.

First, I’m not someone who think all guns should be banned, but as a somewhat involuntary gun owner I wouldn’t be hysterical if society decided we want to get rid of guns. Most significantly I think a ban is impractical and it’s hardly worth advocating because of the 33% of Americans that own guns and among those who do not, slightly more than half could see themselves as owning a gun in the future.

That said, I am all for making a universal and comprehensive process for approving people who seek gun ownership. Like having psych evaluations and ways to seize weapons from those deemed to be unstable (“red flag laws”) in all states. How about limiting ammunition sales? Considering how many mass shootings and crimes are committed by young people, I think raising the minimum age to 21 or 24 is entirely reasonable.

As for AR-15 and similar guns, there is a lot of debate about banning these. The pro-gun activists come up with technical reasons as to why it is impossible to define an assault rifle. Point taken but as someone who has fired a multitude of guns, I don’t think anyone needs a rifle that shoots that big of rounds (5.56x45), that quickly, that accurately, that easily, with a magazine that holds 30+ rounds for “self defense”. I would not be opposed to a semi-automatic rifle ban. 

Secondly, how the hell did this psycho A. Not receive some sort of regular some sort of regular counseling after at his high school stating his goal after graduation was to “commit a murder-suicide” less than a year ago, which he claimed was a joke? What sort of investigation did the police do? Had they looked at his digital footprint would they have found what they’re finding now? What steps did the hospital take to actually evaluate him and what was their conclusion? 

I don’t know how many of these shootings have to happen where after the fact it turns out a lot of people knew the shooter was disturbed and said/did nothing. Literally every case of a mass murder perpetrated by a teen/young adult has unacceptable failures of policy and oversight. When the red flags are raised to authorities, they fail to follow through. Good of the school to immediately call the police in this instance, but it’s too bad the system failed everyone. 

As someone who works at one of the worlds top psych hospitals and owns a mental health program, I am all too familiar how many run of the mill psych wards work. There is no time for serious evaluation. The insurance company doesn’t want to pay to begin with- let alone any longer than necessary, and the patient is discharged. They might recommend an outside therapist but there’s not follow up. Besides, the patient is probably put on a 7 month waiting list for said therapist, especially if state insurance is involved. 

I suspect he was brought to the hospital, spent 6 minutes with him where they asked him if he wanted to kill people and himself, he said no, and the hospital determined there was no specific threat. The reality is in most cases a psychpath isn’t going to be diagnosed in a 24hr emergency stay. My hospital has a a specialized psych diagnostic program that’s usually a minimum of 2 weeks, usually 4. Patients are basically individually observed during all waking hours and every test is thrown at them, from psych tests to blood work to sleep studies to MRIs and even genetic testing. But 2 weeks of this program costs $50k+ out of pocket only. 

As understand, NY’s red flag laws should have prevented him from purchasing a gun. Why was he not flagged? Who had the authority to flag him? If his case doesn’t meet the criteria, I don’t know what does. If someone is dragged involuntary to the hospital because they said they wanted to commit murder/suicide, maybe let’s not allow them to purchase a gun?  

I have long advocated that is a broken system. Most psych hospitals suck and try to move people out the door as quickly as possible. Quite frankly, if someone makes a threat against a school or any type of mass shooting, these need to be handled much more rigorously- why not make it a crime, or some sort of situation where you’re not charged but mandated to regular therapy for a year? Or they get tagged as a potential risk and have to go through a year or therapy + a more extensive background/social evaluation if they ever want to buy a gun again.  

The irony is most gun owners support more regulations. If society fails to enact and enforce sensible guardrails, we end up with with our current state. Maybe eventually the “not another inch crowd” will realize the more they obstruct sensible reforms, the more likely more people are going to oppose guns altogether as tragedies like this continue. 

I believe there is room to compromise when it comes to stricter regulation. I don’t care if we have to grandfather in the existing owners to existing laws for them to agree so maybe we can have a safer future.


----------



## SuperMatt

This terrorist was planning the mass murder for a long time. He had taken multiple trips to that Tops to make sure there were plenty of black people there and to do some recon.



			https://wapo.st/3PrHuyo
		

(paywall removed)



> A review of more than 600 pages of messages by The Washington Post found that Gendron resolved in December to kill those he slurred as “replacers,” and decided in February to target Buffalo’s Tops grocery store based on its local African American population. In March, he performed a reconnaissance-style trip to monitor the store’s security and map out its aisles, the messages show. When a store guard confronted him about why he had repeatedly entered that day, Gendron made excuses and fled in what he described as “a close call,” the messages state.
> Having identified the supermarket as “attack area 1,” Gendron detailed two additional Buffalo locations as areas at which to “shoot all blacks,” according to the messages, which showed that he had charted routes to each location, worked out the times needed for each shootout and assessed that more than three dozen people in all could be fatally shot.






> Having considered attacking in other cities including Rochester, Gendron wrote online on Feb. 17 that he had a “new plan”: Buffalo, which had a higher proportion of Black residents. “TOPS Friendly Markets,” he wrote, “damn that is looking good.”
> The messages detailed a March 8 trip to the supermarket in which Gendron allegedly surveilled the movements of the store’s security guards and made observations of the weapons they carried. Detailed sketches of the store’s floor plan were included in the messages, together with multiple photographs, including a parking spot “for the attack.”
> The written account said its author was stopped and ticketed for driving at 64 mph in a 40 mph section of State Highway 36 en route to Buffalo on March 8. The Post obtained a copy of a speeding ticket issued to Gendron by a New York state trooper that day that matches those details.




This man is pure evil.


----------



## AG_PhamD

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> _*His actions will be attributed to "mental illness.*"_ In fact, in Gendron's manifesto he makes clear that he knows what he is doing and why. He clearly articulates the motivations, reasoning and planning involved in his act of anti-Black terrorism. Of course, the vast majority of people with mental illnesses are not violent.



Just a point of clarification- Just because he wasn’t psychotic (disconnected from reality) or disassociated (disconnected from self) doesn’t mean he wasn’t mentally ill. In cases of severe psychosis / disassociation, people don’t usually have the coherence to arrange and execute a plan, such as a mass murder. To be clear though, one can be mentally ill and still be 100% responsible for his/her crimes.

It’s very possible he has a personality disorder, such as antisocial personality disorder which is primarily characterized by a lack of empathy (psychopathy) and often little-to-no conscience. Personality disorders often include traits from other PD’s- such as narcissism, borderline traits (inability to regulate emotions, unstable identity, pathological fear of abandonment, drastic idolization of people they like and drastic devaluation those they don’t), etc. Personality disorders can be very dangerous to the individual and others if the condition is not well managed, often a difficult process. That’s not to say all people with PD’s are dangerous though.

It is also possible he is completely sane and just has extremely radical ideas. Studies suggest many young people who leave their comfortable lifestyle to become Islamic extremists are perfectly sane, but are radicalized to do insane things. I’m not quite so sure these individuals are entirely mentally healthy- I could potentially see depression and identity conflicts as catalysts for seeking a sense of  belonging and purpose with such groups filling those voids. But such mental illness case is a very different circumstance from psychotic disorders and personality disorders.

Given we know very little about the perpetrator, we can only speculate what conditions he may or may not have. You can’t diagnose someone you’ve never met, which also includes ruling he is not mentally ill. Those evaluating him will have to make that determination.

We can speculate though and I suspect you’re more than likely correct that the shooter was competent and well aware of his actions and motivations when he committed this atrocity. I’ll have to look at his manifesto as I have not, but it would not be surprising to me if there were underlying issues. There’s a plenty of radical fat-right wingers with contemptible ideologies in the country, but they’re usually not mass murdering strangers. 



SuperMatt said:


> This terrorist was planning the mass murder for a long time. He had taken multiple trips to that Tops to make sure there were plenty of black people there and to do some recon.




According to the local Buffalo news, the shooter reportedly plagiarized parts of his manifesto from the Christ Church perpetrator. It’s pretty bad when someone has to use other peoples words to articulate their motivation for committing heinous crimes.









						Racist screed linked to Buffalo mass shooter ‘plagiarized’ portions from Christchurch mosque shooter, expert says
					

BUFFALO, N.Y. (WIVB) – The 180-page screed being attributed to a white supremacist charged in Saturday’s shooting rampage that targeted African-Americans at a Buffalo grocery reads like an operatio…




					www.wivb.com


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1526270407262601216/
"Guns aren't the problem", completely dependent on who you are of course.


----------



## SuperMatt

A little snippet in a book review, that I thought was pertinent to this discussion:



> For instance, “A History of Violence,” written after the Las Vegas gun massacre of 2017, explains how what is now America’s most widely owned rifle, the AR-15, arose from the military’s quest for a lightweight weapon that could do maximum damage through high-volume “area fire,” rather than relying on carefully aimed sniper shots. He also recounts the grisly sequence of experiments in “wound ballistics” that guided the choice of ammunition for the AR-15 and its military descendant, the M16. (According to his family, the AR-15’s designer, Eugene Stoner, never imagined this weapon in civilian hands.) With a slightly modified AR-15, the Las Vegas gunman was able to kill 58 people and wound at least 400 more. “There was nothing particularly remarkable about the shooter’s skills,” Klay writes. “His lethality was primarily a function of the sheer number of rounds he could put downrange.”




That’s from The NY Times review of _Uncertain Ground_ by Phil Klay.

Unfortunately, there are already millions of these weapons already in civilian hands, but they never should have been there in the first place.


----------



## SuperMatt

The killer in Tops wasn’t mentally ill. He is just a racist butthole. 



> Rose Wysocki, 56, who works as a produce manager at Tops Friendly Market, told The Post that 18-year-old Payton Gendron made the alarming remark when he asked her for an item while she was working last month.
> 
> 
> “I showed him where it was and he was acting stupid … I took him to the item and gave it to him. As I did, he remarked, ‘You look like you don’t belong here,'” Wysocki said of the encounter, which took place around Easter.
> 
> 
> “I said, ‘What do you mean by that?’ He said, ‘You look like you just belong in a suburb store, not here.’ I said, ‘Well, I was in a suburb store and I got promoted here and I love it here. I love my customers, co-workers, the store. It’s a great place to work.’”
> 
> 
> “As he turned and walked away, he said, ‘Another n—r lover,'” she added.
> 
> 
> Wysocki claims she saw Gendron at the store several times after he made the initial remarks — but she avoided him every time.



Real nice guy. Knew exactly what he was doing. Easy access to the weapons of war made it possible for him to carry out his sick fantasies. So enough of the “mental health” argument from the gun lovers. The real problem is military weapons easily accessible to anybody.


----------



## GermanSuplex

The GOP is so neck-deep in this pro-Trump, anti-reality, anti-black, anti-Jew, anti-Muslim, anti-immigrant, anti-democracy cult that I’m really at a loss. If you could go back in time to 2004, 2006 or so and tell me I’d be missing the diet-racism, bigotry and dog whistling of the GOP, I’d have laughed, but here we are where pre-Obama GOP racism seems less awful.

How can people look at simple facts and pretend white supremacy isn’t a problem, racism isn’t a problem, etc? Fox News touts replacement theory and mass election fraud, but claims total innocence when someone shoots a bunch of black and brown people in a church, a Walmart, a grocery store… in fact, Tucker is already crying like a victim himself, claiming the left just wants to use this incident to limit free speech, I really don’t know how that guy lives with himself, money must really make it easier to do bad things. These people have more sympathy for Kyle Rittenhouse and George Zimmerman than any and all of the victims of this unthinkable crime.

Listening to Tucker Carlson twist and dilute this to “because a teen killed ten strangers you shouldn’t be allowed to state your political beliefs out loud” and Ingraham spin this as just fuel for the left‘s agenda, along with a “protest that goes wrong” (her take on January 6) makes you start losing hope for humanity.


----------



## Yoused

GermanSuplex said:


> but here we are where pre-Obama GOP racism seems less awful




Some forms of cancer present 0 symptoms until at last they decide to kill you outright. Police violence was nearly non-existent until the rapid rise of cell phone cameras suddenly caused it to exist. Racism was almost certainly as bad as it is now, just not as overt/visible.


----------



## AG_PhamD

The shooter apparently wrote in his diary that in response to a feral cat fighting with his pet cat, he violently killed the feral cat. He also included grotesque pictures along with the following entry.



Spoiler: Reader discretion advised. 



When I came home at ~10:30 I was eating pizza bites when I hard my cat Paige scream from the garage. 

I quickly enter and the gray cat was attacking her. I then spent the next hour and a half chasing the cat around the garage and stabbing it with my knife (the camo one).

It bled from the mouth at about 11:00 and at about 11:45 I was able to grab the cats tail and wind up and smack the cats head on the concrete ground.  I did that a few times and when it went limp I grabber [sic] a hatchet and swung at its neck ~20 times until it came off.

Honestly right now I don’t feel anything about killing that cat. I thought I would be in pain but I literally just feel blank.



He also reportedly has many entries debating whether or not to carry out his plan. He repeatedly states he either needs to kill people or commit suicide. That’s not considered a healthy state of mind. 

He also seems to be highly specific and obsessive- like documenting his food intake, often listing time events occurred for no significant reason, researching zip codes with the highest black populations, documenting the number of black people in stores, etc- not to mention the obvious, that this idea of “the great replacement” seemingly occupied his mind for months. 

He also at one point claims never to have been diagnosed with a mental health disorder and believed himself to be sane, but at other points questions his sanity. 

The cat story is indicative of a serious issue. I’d be curious to know what age this occurred. Defending your pet from another animal is one thing… torturing and dismembering it- not normal. Neither is graphically recounting it in a diary with accompanying photographs- including one of blood splatter on his face. Recording such an event suggests some sort of delight, curiosity, appreciation, etc with the experience. This event would be consistent with antisocial personality disorder. 

Some of the other behaviors could be related to OCD. He did wear a hazmat suit to school during COVID, though that could be narcissistic or histrionic behavior- these are “cluster b” traits that often occur with ASPD. 

The perpetrator is apparently refusing a psych evaluation by the court which is something I see routinely with narcissists in my field. 

A lot of these characteristics, along with his lack of social skills and friends, could also consistent with high functioning autism, but is less likely IMO for a number of reasons. 

I really don’t understand where these proclamations come from that “he is not mentally ill”. *It’s important to note someone can be seriously mentally ill, the mental illness may be a factor in their crime, and yet they can still be 100% responsible for their crime*. A psychopathic murder is well aware killing people is considered morally wrong and is illegal, he just has zero regard for other people. 

In this case mental may have made him more likely to hurting others or dwell on his deranged notions but killing people is a choice- he appears to have been very much able to control his behavior, deciding when and where and who to kill. It’s possible/debatable if mental illness made him more susceptible to being radicalized by white supremacists, but ultimately racism is a choice too.


----------



## SuperMatt

AG_PhamD said:


> The shooter apparently wrote in his diary that in response to a feral cat fighting with his pet cat, he violently killed the feral cat. He also included grotesque pictures along with the following entry.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Reader discretion advised.
> 
> 
> 
> When I came home at ~10:30 I was eating pizza bites when I hard my cat Paige scream from the garage.
> 
> I quickly enter and the gray cat was attacking her. I then spent the next hour and a half chasing the cat around the garage and stabbing it with my knife (the camo one).
> 
> It bled from the mouth at about 11:00 and at about 11:45 I was able to grab the cats tail and wind up and smack the cats head on the concrete ground.  I did that a few times and when it went limp I grabber [sic] a hatchet and swung at its neck ~20 times until it came off.
> 
> Honestly right now I don’t feel anything about killing that cat. I thought I would be in pain but I literally just feel blank.
> 
> 
> 
> He also reportedly has many entries debating whether or not to carry out his plan. He repeatedly states he either needs to kill people or commit suicide. That’s not considered a healthy state of mind.
> 
> He also seems to be highly specific and obsessive- like documenting his food intake, often listing time events occurred for no significant reason, researching zip codes with the highest black populations, documenting the number of black people in stores, etc- not to mention the obvious, that this idea of “the great replacement” seemingly occupied his mind for months.
> 
> He also at one point claims never to have been diagnosed with a mental health disorder and believed himself to be sane, but at other points questions his sanity.
> 
> The cat story is indicative of a serious issue. I’d be curious to know what age this occurred. Defending your pet from another animal is one thing… torturing and dismembering it- not normal. Neither is graphically recounting it in a diary with accompanying photographs- including one of blood splatter on his face. Recording such an event suggests some sort of delight, curiosity, appreciation, etc with the experience. This event would be consistent with antisocial personality disorder.
> 
> Some of the other behaviors could be related to OCD. He did wear a hazmat suit to school during COVID, though that could be narcissistic or histrionic behavior- these are “cluster b” traits that often occur with ASPD.
> 
> The perpetrator is apparently refusing a psych evaluation by the court which is something I see routinely with narcissists in my field.
> 
> A lot of these characteristics, along with his lack of social skills and friends, could also consistent with high functioning autism, but is less likely IMO for a number of reasons.
> 
> I really don’t understand where these proclamations come from that “he is not mentally ill”. *It’s important to note someone can be seriously mentally ill, the mental illness may be a factor in their crime, and yet they can still be 100% responsible for their crime*. A psychopathic murder is well aware killing people is considered morally wrong and is illegal, he just has zero regard for other people.
> 
> In this case mental may have made him more likely to hurting others or dwell on his deranged notions but killing people is a choice- he appears to have been very much able to control his behavior, deciding when and where and who to kill. It’s possible/debatable if mental illness made him more susceptible to being radicalized by white supremacists, but ultimately racism is a choice too.



Neither you nor I are psychiatrists nor psychologists as far as I know. And even if one of us was, we can’t diagnose the person without meeting with them.

So you can believe he’s mentally ill if you want, and I can believe he’s not. In the end, it’s just our opinions.

But here is where I’m coming from on this: I’m sick of gun lovers saying “It’s not a gun problem; it’s a mental health problem.” I’m also sick of far-right ideologues pushing racist theories saying “Not my problem; this guy is just mentally ill.“

So yeah, I’m going to push back when, once again, both the gun nuts and the purveyors of “replacement theory” try to use the “mental health” nonsense to defend their indefensible actions, yet again.

And I don’t know where you grew up, but I don’t think what he did to a feral cat is that weird compared to stuff kids did in my area (grew up in Buffalo’s suburbs).


----------



## AG_PhamD

SuperMatt said:


> Neither you nor I are psychiatrists nor psychologists as far as I know. And even if one of us was, we can’t diagnose the person without meeting with them.
> 
> So you can believe he’s mentally ill if you want, and I can believe he’s not. In the end, it’s just our opinions.
> 
> But here is where I’m coming from on this: I’m sick of gun lovers saying “It’s not a gun problem; it’s a mental health problem.” I’m also sick of far-right ideologues pushing racist theories saying “Not my problem; this guy is just mentally ill.“
> 
> So yeah, I’m going to push back when, once again, both the gun nuts and the purveyors of “replacement theory” try to use the “mental health” nonsense to defend their indefensible actions, yet again.
> 
> And I don’t know where you grew up, but I don’t think what he did to a feral cat is that weird compared to stuff kids did in my area (grew up in Buffalo’s suburbs).




I am board certified in psychopharmacology and prescribe psych patients on a daily basis, spent the past 10 years working in one the top psychiatric hospitals in the country, regularly discuss events like these with other psych professionals who specialize in very niche diagnoses, own/operate now 2 private residential psych treatment facilities. So perhaps have some experience in this field to _speculate_ possibilities, which anyone can do. 

I never claimed to make a diagnosis (thus using indefinite terms like may, might, possibly, could, etc) and explicitly said 2 posts ago a diagnosis cannot be made without evaluation. 

Perhaps I misunderstand but you’ve correctly said it’s not possible to make a diagnosis without evaluating the subject. Where I lose you is how it’s possible to rule out all diagnoses without any evaluation. Unless you’re suggesting mental health conditions only exist after they are diagnosed… if a tree falls in the forest, does it make a sound? 

You’re more than welcome to your opinion (as usual, I am not, apparently). But I gladly welcome the discussion. 

I grew up in Connecticut in the. No, kids killing animals was not normal, certainly not a cat- let alone torturing them to death. 

I think most people in the perps case would chase off the feral cat and tend to their injured pet- and let animal control handle the rest. But I understand some people in certain conditions might kill the cat- but in a far more humane manner. 

That’s very different than stabbing the cat 10x with a knife, then decapitating it with a hatchet 20x, taking pictures of whatever mangled mess remained, photographing the blood spatter on your face, and then recounting the experience in disturbingly specific detail with the aforementioned pictures in your diary. 

This is not a “kids will be kids” situation and should never be treated as such. In fact what he did is also more than likely a felony. But you’re suggesting there’s no possibility of a connection between torturing a cat to death and later murdering 10 people? It isn’t a possibility he learned in killing the cat he has no moral qualms of taking lives? 

I’m not sure anyone is defending his actions (except some white nationalist extremists) and I’m not sure what mental illness has to do with it. Multiple things can be true at once- he can be mentally ill and responsible for his crimes and a racist scumbag all at the same time. Also, there can be a legitimate problem with how mental illnesses are handled while it can also be true the current gun laws are totally insufficient. These issues are not binary or mutually exclusive.   

And I hope you’re not insinuating I am a member of the groups you mentioned. I will assume not.


----------



## Joe

I made the mistake of watching some of the footage he recorded on his helmet camera. I came across it on Twitter.  

At one point he comes across a white man hiding behind a cash register, and APOLOGIZES to the white man before moving on to the next black person. WTF

When are people going to realize we have a white supremacist problem in this country? Tucker Carlson and Fox News are radicalizing people. We see it everyday. I have friends that do not even talk to some of their family members because they walk around like this dude who just killed people at a grocery store. It's beyond fucking crazy how brainwashed people have become over the last few years.


----------



## Deleted member 215

The problem is that this country's white supremacist problem never went away. It wasn't all that long ago that you had lynchings which were treated like a town event for the whole family by white people, police letting their dogs attack black protesters, and white people threatening mass violence over a black child attending public school. This racial madness might seem like it's something entirely of the past, but it's deeply embedded in American culture and in some places and among some people, it has not at all gone away. It is very much being encouraged by fringe and in some cases mainstream media. This country is sick, and unfortunately we don't seem to know how to cure it.


----------



## SuperMatt

AG_PhamD said:


> I am board certified in psychopharmacology and prescribe psych patients on a daily basis, spent the past 10 years working in one the top psychiatric hospitals in the country, regularly discuss events like these with other psych professionals who specialize in very niche diagnoses, own/operate now 2 private residential psych treatment facilities. So perhaps have some experience in this field to _speculate_ possibilities, which anyone can do.
> 
> I never claimed to make a diagnosis (thus using indefinite terms like may, might, possibly, could, etc) and explicitly said 2 posts ago a diagnosis cannot be made without evaluation.
> 
> Perhaps I misunderstand but you’ve correctly said it’s not possible to make a diagnosis without evaluating the subject. Where I lose you is how it’s possible to rule out all diagnoses without any evaluation. Unless you’re suggesting mental health conditions only exist after they are diagnosed… if a tree falls in the forest, does it make a sound?
> 
> You’re more than welcome to your opinion (as usual, I am not, apparently). But I gladly welcome the discussion.
> 
> I grew up in Connecticut in the. No, kids killing animals was not normal, certainly not a cat- let alone torturing them to death.
> 
> I think most people in the perps case would chase off the feral cat and tend to their injured pet- and let animal control handle the rest. But I understand some people in certain conditions might kill the cat- but in a far more humane manner.
> 
> That’s very different than stabbing the cat 10x with a knife, then decapitating it with a hatchet 20x, taking pictures of whatever mangled mess remained, photographing the blood spatter on your face, and then recounting the experience in disturbingly specific detail with the aforementioned pictures in your diary.
> 
> This is not a “kids will be kids” situation and should never be treated as such. In fact what he did is also more than likely a felony. But you’re suggesting there’s no possibility of a connection between torturing a cat to death and later murdering 10 people? It isn’t a possibility he learned in killing the cat he has no moral qualms of taking lives?
> 
> I’m not sure anyone is defending his actions (except some white nationalist extremists) and I’m not sure what mental illness has to do with it. Multiple things can be true at once- he can be mentally ill and responsible for his crimes and a racist scumbag all at the same time. Also, there can be a legitimate problem with how mental illnesses are handled while it can also be true the current gun laws are totally insufficient. These issues are not binary or mutually exclusive.
> 
> And I hope you’re not insinuating I am a member of the groups you mentioned. I will assume not.



I don’t know whether you are in any of the groups mentioned. I don’t assume that you are.

I will defer to your knowledge in the mental health arena on this. It was pretty normal in my experience for kids to pull the wings off a fly or cut a worm in half, or try to fry ants with a magnifying glass... or shoot animals if their family is into hunting. It certainly does seem that this terrorist went pretty far beyond that, torturing a mammal, not an insect, so maybe he does have some kind of mental problem. Or maybe he’s just a bad person.

So, I agree it’s quite possible he has *some* kind of mental problem. However, my concern is that we have the NRA and the far-right ideologues that try to blame this (and similar events) *solely* on mental health. Making weapons of war harder to obtain, and stopping the hate speech are just as important, if not more important than improving mental healthcare when it comes to these kind of incidents.

As for mental health treatment overall, our country’s efforts are woefully insufficient in my opinion. I think it should absolutely be a priority. But I don’t want people to think that improving mental healthcare without addressing extremist ideology and the easy access to weapons of war will solve the mass shooting problem. It’s part of the solution, and improving the care will solve a lot of other problems too, and I wish we did more for the mentally ill in America.


----------



## SuperMatt

Guns aren’t the problem…. Right?



> Teen shoots dad in argument over bedtime​






			https://www.sacbee.com/news/nation-world/national/article261533327.html


----------



## AG_PhamD

SuperMatt said:


> I don’t know whether you are in any of the groups mentioned. I don’t assume that you are.
> 
> I will defer to your knowledge in the mental health arena on this. It was pretty normal in my experience for kids to pull the wings off a fly or cut a worm in half, or try to fry ants with a magnifying glass... or shoot animals if their family is into hunting. It certainly does seem that this terrorist went pretty far beyond that, torturing a mammal, not an insect, so maybe he does have some kind of mental problem. Or maybe he’s just a bad person.
> 
> So, I agree it’s quite possible he has *some* kind of mental problem. However, my concern is that we have the NRA and the far-right ideologues that try to blame this (and similar events) *solely* on mental health. Making weapons of war harder to obtain, and stopping the hate speech are just as important, if not more important than improving mental healthcare when it comes to these kind of incidents.
> 
> As for mental health treatment overall, our country’s efforts are woefully insufficient in my opinion. I think it should absolutely be a priority. But I don’t want people to think that improving mental healthcare without addressing extremist ideology and the easy access to weapons of war will solve the mass shooting problem. It’s part of the solution, and improving the care will solve a lot of other problems too, and I wish we did more for the mentally ill in America.




It’s possible to have a mental health issue and be a bad person at the same time. Just because someone is mentally ill does not mean we cannot criticize or excuse their behavior. 

I think it’s fair to say the NRA and right in general (not just the far right) refuse to look at the gun legislation. As a practical person I don’t think banning AR-15’s let alone most/all guns is remotely possible given the statistics and legal barriers. But I do think there is a middle ground of at least raising the minimum age for ownership given how many of these mass shootings are committed by people under 21 and crimes under 24. There’s many other things that could be done without banning guns entirely. 

In this case you have to wonder why no one- parents, teachers, police, etc reported him for the red flag law. It makes you wonder if there is a bystander effect. This should happen automatically, probably by both the police and school. There should also be some sort of watch list for people who make threats like this. It seems like if someone had investigated his digital footprint, they would have recognized just how sick and radicalized this kid was. 

As for general tracking of domestic terrorism, clearly the FBI could be doing more to track radical individuals, not just radical groups. Of course part of the problem is that hate speech alone isn’t illegal or enough to justify an investigation. Whether or not hate speech should be a crime of course is a controversial issue. 

I agree, this is definitely something that requires a multi-pronged approach.


----------



## SuperMatt

AG_PhamD said:


> It’s possible to have a mental health issue and be a bad person at the same time. Just because someone is mentally ill does not mean we cannot criticize or excuse their behavior.
> 
> I think it’s fair to say the NRA and right in general (not just the far right) refuse to look at the gun legislation. As a practical person I don’t think banning AR-15’s let alone most/all guns is remotely possible given the statistics and legal barriers. But I do think there is a middle ground of at least raising the minimum age for ownership given how many of these mass shootings are committed by people under 21 and crimes under 24. There’s many other things that could be done without banning guns entirely.
> 
> In this case you have to wonder why no one- parents, teachers, police, etc reported him for the red flag law. It makes you wonder if there is a bystander effect. This should happen automatically, probably by both the police and school. There should also be some sort of watch list for people who make threats like this. It seems like if someone had investigated his digital footprint, they would have recognized just how sick and radicalized this kid was.
> 
> As for general tracking of domestic terrorism, clearly the FBI could be doing more to track radical individuals, not just radical groups. Of course part of the problem is that hate speech alone isn’t illegal or enough to justify an investigation. Whether or not hate speech should be a crime of course is a controversial issue.
> 
> I agree, this is definitely something that requires a multi-pronged approach.



I agree the genie is out of the bottle when it comes to assault weapons. Raising the age to at least match the drinking age is a no-brainer you’d think. But the Supreme Court has already prevented that.

Regarding the “red flag” laws, hindsight is 20/20. This was a white kid in what looks like a “nice” neighborhood. He did something weird, but not weird enough for people to think he should be locked up or prevented from buying guns. And a lot of crazy stuff we know about now was previously hidden.

There is no way we can see things like this coming with every young white man influenced by far right propaganda. That’s why I believe gun control is a much more effective solution. But with the current Supreme Court makeup and the entire Republican Party beholden to an extreme NRA, I don’t see it happening.

So, if the LEAST anybody could do is get stronger “red flag” laws and have mandatory background checks, they should do it. But we’ve seen even mandatory background checks, and putting people on the no-fly list onto a no-gun list too, supported by 80-90% of Americans, will never pass with Republicans because their NRA bosses won’t let them.


----------



## Huntn

SuperMatt said:


> I don’t know whether you are in any of the groups mentioned. I don’t assume that you are.
> 
> I will defer to your knowledge in the mental health arena on this. It was pretty normal in my experience for kids to pull the wings off a fly or cut a worm in half, or try to fry ants with a magnifying glass... or shoot animals if their family is into hunting. It certainly does seem that this terrorist went pretty far beyond that, torturing a mammal, not an insect, so maybe he does have some kind of mental problem. Or maybe he’s just a bad person.
> 
> So, I agree it’s quite possible he has *some* kind of mental problem. However, my concern is that we have the NRA and the far-right ideologues that try to blame this (and similar events) *solely* on mental health. Making weapons of war harder to obtain, and stopping the hate speech are just as important, if not more important than improving mental healthcare when it comes to these kind of incidents.
> 
> As for mental health treatment overall, our country’s efforts are woefully insufficient in my opinion. I think it should absolutely be a priority. But I don’t want people to think that improving mental healthcare without addressing extremist ideology and the easy access to weapons of war will solve the mass shooting problem. It’s part of the solution, and improving the care will solve a lot of other problems too, and I wish we did more for the mentally ill in America.



Racism, Religion, Extremism, intolerance, Facism, Hate, Mental Ilness, STUPID, and the unwise idea that every adult asshole deserves to wield lethal force, that is my summary of our challenge, a challenge that could likely become our undoing if more people don’t start paying attention and become proactive.

Despite insistence that life is precious (anti-abortion), the reality is that it’s cheap (gun deaths), real cheap. 

Already, Democracy is slipping though our fingers. We are spiraling down. Yeah, Biden won, and Dems barely hold Congress, but for 2 years Republikans have been working to “fix“ that. Watch what happens in 2022.  In todays climate of Gun Worshiping, Koolaid drinkers, if not already, you’d better arm thyself for the very possible, coming National conflict. Don’t bring a knife to a gun fight.

Sure I could always be pleasantly surprised, but I prefer to be prepared.  In the meantime the country bleeds daily for our gun freedoms, and the gun lobby looks you in the eye, sqeezes their wallets and proclaim it’s worth it.


----------



## SuperMatt

The Buffalo terrorist is from Broome County NY. After reading this account of an interview with the county’s District Attorney, it’s obvious that racist attitudes are pretty common around there.



> To address domestic terrorism in the local community, Korchak said he will “have to follow up with the Governor”, following Hochul’s Wednesday announcement. But he didn’t definitely label the Buffalo massacre as domestic terrorism, saying in his own view, it’s just murder. *“To me, terrorism is flying planes into buildings,”* Korchak said.
> 
> “I don’t know as racial bias… it’s not limited to Broome County,” Korchak said. He explained that Broome County doesn’t have many racial bias cases, and it’s important to educate the community. But when it comes to this case and the suspect’s alleged manifesto being authored in Broome County, “That’s where you’re battling the First Amendment because everyone has the right to be stupid,” he said.




The “flying planes” BS shows that this guy, like many on the right, think it’s only “terrorism” if the person doing it is a Muslim.

If I was the terrorist‘s lawyer, I’d be BEGGING for a change of venue to Broome county for the trial. This DA seems like he has no problem with what happened.

This is not a “lone wolf” situation. It’s not a one-off. This kid is a product of racist attitudes in his community. Racist practices segregated black people into a region of Buffalo with only one decent grocery store. This terrorist had help from others and from society as a whole. And we’ve been over the extreme gun laws in America ad nauseum already…









						‘Everyone has the right to be stupid’: Broome County DA Press Conference on Buffalo Shooting
					

The Broome County District Attorney, Michael Korchak will be holding a press conference at 1:30 PM today to discuss some of the previous history of the man that is charged in the Buffalo Tops mass …




					www.wivb.com
				












						After Buffalo Massacre, “Now Is the Time to Renew the Call for Reparations”
					

In one of this year’s deadliest mass shootings, a white supremacist opened fire Saturday on a supermarket in a predominantly Black neighborhood in Buffalo, New York, killing 10 and wounding three others. Eleven of the victims are Black. The 18-year-old suspect posted racist ideology online...



					www.democracynow.org


----------



## JayMysteri0

Well...


----------



## AG_PhamD

SuperMatt said:


> The Buffalo terrorist is from Broome County NY. After reading this account of an interview with the county’s District Attorney, it’s obvious that racist attitudes are pretty common around there.
> 
> 
> 
> The “flying planes” BS shows that this guy, like many on the right, think it’s only “terrorism” if the person doing it is a Muslim.
> 
> If I was the terrorist‘s lawyer, I’d be BEGGING for a change of venue to Broome county for the trial. This DA seems like he has no problem with what happened.
> 
> This is not a “lone wolf” situation. It’s not a one-off. This kid is a product of racist attitudes in his community. Racist practices segregated black people into a region of Buffalo with only one decent grocery store. This terrorist had help from others and from society as a whole. And we’ve been over the extreme gun laws in America ad nauseum already…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ‘Everyone has the right to be stupid’: Broome County DA Press Conference on Buffalo Shooting
> 
> 
> The Broome County District Attorney, Michael Korchak will be holding a press conference at 1:30 PM today to discuss some of the previous history of the man that is charged in the Buffalo Tops mass …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.wivb.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> After Buffalo Massacre, “Now Is the Time to Renew the Call for Reparations”
> 
> 
> In one of this year’s deadliest mass shootings, a white supremacist opened fire Saturday on a supermarket in a predominantly Black neighborhood in Buffalo, New York, killing 10 and wounding three others. Eleven of the victims are Black. The 18-year-old suspect posted racist ideology online...
> 
> 
> 
> www.democracynow.org




I’m not sure what state law says, but apparently there is no penalty for domestic terrorism under federal law, which is quite shocking. Especially when the FBI says radical white nationalists are the biggest domestic threat. 

The definitions of terrorism under federal law are rather interesting. They mostly apply to committing crimes against  government officials or property, mass transportation systems, maritime vessels, using large scale weapons and WMDs, and aiding designated terrorist organizations. The    only instance that involves harm against American civilians is if it happens abroad. https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/uscode.php?def_id=18-USC-763651625-782330727

It seems rather strange there is no application of the law for domestic politically motivated violence. Maybe there is concern about lesser forms of political violence (ie a protest that gets out of hand) being labeled as terrorism, but I think a distinction could easily be made if the perpetrator commits (OR _plans_ to commit) violence intended to injure many people indiscriminately. 

His actions are certainly a hate crime. I would say a terrorism as well given his manifesto and the fact he called himself a terrorist. The fact that had he set off a bomb or flew a plane into the store he could be charged with terrorism but shooting over a dozen people in a public space he cannot is strange. That said I doubt changing the law would dissuade anyone. 

I suppose to some extent it’s irrelevant at this point. He will be charged with murder with the hate crime on top of it. He will never be seeing the light of day again. If the death penalty was legal in NY, it would certainly be on the table though the degree of mental illness (if any) may be taken into consideration but not necessarily.


----------



## Cmaier

AG_PhamD said:


> I’m not sure what state law says, but apparently there is no penalty for domestic terrorism under federal law, which is quite shocking. Especially when the FBI says radical white nationalists are the biggest domestic threat.
> 
> The definitions of terrorism under federal law are rather interesting. They mostly apply to committing crimes against  government officials or property, mass transportation systems, maritime vessels, using large scale weapons and WMDs, and aiding designated terrorist organizations. The    only instance that involves harm against American civilians is if it happens abroad. https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/uscode.php?def_id=18-USC-763651625-782330727
> 
> It seems rather strange there is no application of the law for domestic politically motivated violence. Maybe there is concern about lesser forms of political violence (ie a protest that gets out of hand) being labeled as terrorism, but I think a distinction could easily be made if the perpetrator commits (OR _plans_ to commit) violence intended to injure many people indiscriminately.




All of that is wrong.

18 USC §2331: 






There are also 57 “federal crimes of terrorism” listed in 18 USC.  That these don’t have “domestic” in their titles is immaterial - they apply to domestic terrorism, as per 18 USC 2331.  And the “there is no penalty for domestic terrorism” is a fake argument made by people who point at 18 USC 2331, which doesn’t list penalties for ANY form of terrorism, because it is a definitions section.


----------



## The-Real-Deal82

There’s been some rather nasty shooting stories making the news in Europe from the States recently. They don’t really have much of an impact these days are they are so expected as the gun culture there is so ridiculous. Land of the free to get shot.


----------



## AG_PhamD

Cmaier said:


> All of that is wrong.
> 
> 18 USC §2331:
> 
> View attachment 14197
> 
> 
> There are also 57 “federal crimes of terrorism” listed in 18 USC.  That these don’t have “domestic” in their titles is immaterial - they apply to domestic terrorism, as per 18 USC 2331.  And the “there is no penalty for domestic terrorism” is a fake argument made by people who point at 18 USC 2331, which doesn’t list penalties for ANY form of terrorism, because it is a definitions section.



No, it’s not a fake argument. Why would people try to defend this perpetrator from terrorism charges? The reality is the law is written in an inconvenient way to charge most mass shooters. To be clear, I have no problem calling this crime what it is- both a hate crime and domestic terrorism.

Honestly, you don’t think the Biden DOJ or FBI wouldn’t be prosecuting terrorism charges if they could? Especially when Biden specifically called the shooting “domestic terrorism”. 

I suggest you look at *all* of Title 18 Chapter 113B. The federal law differentiates between “domestic terrorism” (basically the definition you gave) and “international terrorism” (basically what I listed).

If we want to be precise, there is no all-encompassing charge of “terrorism” or “domestic terrorism”, rather a people are charged with terrorism related offenses. For example,  Dzhokar Tsarnaev, the Boston Marathon Bomber, was charged with “using a weapon of mass destruction”, “conspiracy to plant a bomb in  public place, “bombing a place of public use” (amongst many other crimes). Nowhere is he charged with “terrorism”. 

First 113B  lists these penalties for terrorism-associated murder and manslaughter:


> a) Homicide.—*Whoever kills a national of the United States, while such national is outside the United States*, shall—
> 
> (1) if the killing is murder (as defined in section 1111(a)), be fined under this title, punished by death or imprisonment for any term of years or for life, or both;
> 
> (2) if the killing is a voluntary manslaughter as defined in section 1112(a) of this title, be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and
> 
> (3) if the killing is an involuntary manslaughter as defined in section 1112(a) of this title, be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
> 
> 
> (b) Attempt or Conspiracy With Respect to Homicide.—*Whoever outside the United States attempts *to kill, or engages in a conspiracy to kill, a national of the United States shall—
> 
> (1) in the case of an attempt to commit a killing that is a murder as defined in this chapter, be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both; and
> 
> (2) in the case of a conspiracy by two or more persons to commit a killing that is a murder as defined in section 1111(a) of this title, if one or more of such persons do any overt act to effect the object of the conspiracy, be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both so fined and so imprisoned.
> 
> 
> (c) Other Conduct.—*Whoever outside the United States* engages in physical violence—
> 
> (1) with intent to cause serious bodily injury to a national of the United States; or
> 
> (2) with the result that serious bodily injury is caused to a national of the United States; shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.




Next, there is a whole list of other terrorist-related offenses that include things like bombs, missiles, WMD’s, attacking mass transit, etc and specific penalties for these crimes- as well as various forms of aiding terrorists and their associated penalties. I would however point you to the exemption for such offenses:


> (d) *Exemptions to Jurisdiction.—This section does not apply to—*
> 
> (1) the activities of armed forces during an armed conflict, as those terms are understood under the law of war, which are governed by that law,
> 
> (2) activities undertaken by military forces of a state in the exercise of their official duties; or
> 
> (3) *offenses committed within the United States, where the alleged offender and the victims are United States citizens and the alleged offender is found in the United States*, or where jurisdiction is predicated solely on the nationality of the victims or the alleged offender and the offense has no substantial effect on interstate or foreign commerce.




The law is written so that basically “terrorism” can only apply to to offenders committing crimes who are foreigners or are in someway tied/supporting a foreign entity or established terrorist organization. 

So I’ll reiterate, they do define “domestic terrorism”, but there are no penalties written for domestic terrorism. Someone like the Buffalo shooter could not be charged and penalized with the other federal terrorism offenses that actually carry penalties. And that is why the Feds haven’t charged him or Ethan Crumbly or Nicholas Sandman, or Dylan Roof, or any of the synagogue shooters, etc. 

I believe the law should change. This debate arises with basically every mass murder, especially those motivated by racism, antisemitism, islamophobia, or any other bigoted ideology.

In some sense, all hate crimes are a form of targeted terrorism. Hate crimes, especially unsolved ones, often instill fear in the community. Very often these crimes are not committed just out of hate, but also to intimidate, which can also be terrorism. 

I’m entirely not sure what difference being able to charge such a crime would make in a case like this, but perhaps in a case of conspiracy to commit domestic terrorism it would serve as a sentencing enhancement beyond conspiracy to commit murder or whatever the charge would be. Or perhaps it would enable the authorities be better able investigate?

The state law however is a different story. For example, Ethan Crumbly was charged with terrorism in Michigan. I’m sure NY State has their own terrorism charges but we’d have to look to see if they’re applicable.


----------



## Cmaier

AG_PhamD said:


> No, it’s not a fake argument. Why would people try to defend this perpetrator from terrorism charges? The reality is the law is written in an inconvenient way to charge most mass shooters. To be clear, I have no problem calling this crime what it is- both a hate crime and domestic terrorism.
> 
> Honestly, you don’t think the Biden DOJ or FBI wouldn’t be prosecuting terrorism charges if they could? Especially when Biden specifically called the shooting “domestic terrorism”.
> 
> I suggest you look at *all* of Title 18 Chapter 113B. The federal law differentiates between “domestic terrorism” (basically the definition you gave) and “international terrorism” (basically what I listed).
> 
> If we want to be precise, there is no all-encompassing charge of “terrorism” or “domestic terrorism”, rather a people are charged with terrorism related offenses. For example,  Dzhokar Tsarnaev, the Boston Marathon Bomber, was charged with “using a weapon of mass destruction”, “conspiracy to plant a bomb in  public place, “bombing a place of public use” (amongst many other crimes). Nowhere is he charged with “terrorism”.
> 
> First 113B  lists these penalties for terrorism-associated murder and manslaughter:
> 
> 
> Next, there is a whole list of other terrorist-related offenses that include things like bombs, missiles, WMD’s, attacking mass transit, etc and specific penalties for these crimes- as well as various forms of aiding terrorists and their associated penalties. I would however point you to the exemption for such offenses:
> 
> 
> The law is written so that basically “terrorism” can only apply to to offenders committing crimes who are foreigners or are in someway tied/supporting a foreign entity or established terrorist organization.
> 
> So I’ll reiterate, they do define “domestic terrorism”, but there are no penalties written for domestic terrorism. Someone like the Buffalo shooter could not be charged and penalized with the other federal terrorism offenses that actually carry penalties. And that is why the Feds haven’t charged him or Ethan Crumbly or Nicholas Sandman, or Dylan Roof, or any of the synagogue shooters, etc.
> 
> I believe the law should change. This debate arises with basically every mass murder, especially those motivated by racism, antisemitism, islamophobia, or any other bigoted ideology.
> 
> In some sense, all hate crimes are a form of targeted terrorism. Hate crimes, especially unsolved ones, often instill fear in the community. Very often these crimes are not committed just out of hate, but also to intimidate, which can also be terrorism.
> 
> I’m entirely not sure what difference being able to charge such a crime would make in a case like this, but perhaps in a case of conspiracy to commit domestic terrorism it would serve as a sentencing enhancement beyond conspiracy to commit murder or whatever the charge would be. Or perhaps it would enable the authorities be better able investigate?
> 
> The state law however is a different story. For example, Ethan Crumbly was charged with terrorism in Michigan. I’m sure NY State has their own terrorism charges but we’d have to look to see if they’re applicable.




For someone who gets angry when people mansplain psychology to you, you sure do a lot of mansplaining to incorrectly rebut a lawyer.

Any act that meets the definition of domestic terrorism I provided can be charged under numerous existing federal statutes in title 18, each of which has a penalty associated with it.

”There are no penalties written for domestic terrorism“ is a meaningless thing to say. There are no penalties written for killing someone by drowning them in maple syrup, but you can still charge them with murder.  That’s the way the law works. You don’t have to specify penalties for every kind of murder, every kind of assault, every kind of battery, every kind of manslaughter.  Moreover, the way sentencing guidelines work at the federal level, killing someone as part of domestic terrorism will end up with a higher sentencing bracket than “regular” murder. (Though judges don’t have to follow guidelines).

Now, if you want to say ”domestic terrorism“ should be its own offense, separate from the underlying crimes, and that it should be treated like foreign terrorism, that’s fine. It would make little difference from the perspective of penalties - there are already complicated sentencing guideline formulas that would capture all of this, and federal judges don’t have to follow the guidelines anyway.  It might make people feel better, and perhaps there is justice in labeling someone a convicted domestic terrorist, but that’d be the only difference.

A more important issue is that the FBI is limited in investigating domestic terrorism in ways that it is not limited with respect to foreign terrorism. But this has more to do with constitutional rights than with the fact that domestic terrorism is not a separate crime.

Here’s more, from someone even smarter than me 









						Why New Laws Aren’t Needed to Take Domestic Terrorism More Seriously
					

The government already has plenty of tools to address far-right violence, but not the right priorities.




					www.brennancenter.org


----------



## SuperMatt

The past few posts about the legal definitions of terrorism are interesting. However…





The Broome County DA wasn’t making some legal argument about terrorism. He was speaking off-the-cuff. He showed a lack of sympathy for the victims, and had a very defensive attitude upon being questioned about why he didn’t flag the terrorist and prevent him from buying guns based on past incidents.

Of course, when he saw he was being lambasted in the press, the next day he pretended he was making some legal argument about domestic terrorism, insisting that’s what he meant in the first place. Yeah, right…









						'It is domestic terrorism' Broome County DA clarifies comments on mass shooting in Buffalo
					

Broome County District Attorney Michael Korchak held a press conference Wednesday to discuss the mental evaluation the suspect in the mass shooting at Tops on Jefferson Avenue underwent last June.




					www.wkbw.com
				




The elephant is still in the room: when a white American commits mass murder with the specific intent to terrorize a certain population, to many people, it doesn’t count as terrorism.


----------



## SuperMatt

So, when I reacted to @AG_PhamD concerning the mental health of the (alleged) terrorist in Buffalo, I want you to know a) it was not personal but b) here is why I reacted that way:

Tucker Carlson on his TV show:



> After showing a clip of lawmakers decrying the proliferation of racially motivated domestic terrorism, Carlson offered his twisted take:
> “So, they are continuing to tell you, in the face of all available evidence, that the mass murder you saw over the weekend in Buffalo was inspired by hateful right-wing rhetoric, when in fact that mass murder was committed by someone with diagnosed mental illness that the adults around him apparently ignored,” the prime time star said.
> 
> “So, you saw a shooting by a crazy person that has been hijacked by partisan forces to crush political dissent, to attack civil liberties in this country. You should care about that,” he continued.












						Tucker Carlson Says Racism Was Not The Motive In Buffalo Supermarket Shooting
					

The Fox News host took right-wing denial to new lows to explain a self-professed white supremacist's targeting of people in a Black neighborhood.




					www.huffpost.com
				




As you can see, for this man and his millions of followers, it is never about the harm their racist ideology causes. It’s just a random crazy person.

The mental health crisis in America should encourage people to use LESS inflammatory rhetoric, not more. This person can absolutely have a mental problem AND be a bad person AND a combo of that plus a diet of rhetoric from the likes of Tucker Carlson can lead to white power terrorism.

As long mental health isn’t be used as a get-out-of-jail-free-card by the terrorist or the likes of Tucker Carlson, I’m happy to have the discussion. But I knew for a fact, having seen this dance before, that both the gun fetishists and peddlers of racist ideology would deny any culpability and say “It’s all because of mental health!!!!” Tucker Carlson certainly lived up to my expectations.


----------



## Huntn

SuperMatt said:


> The Buffalo terrorist is from Broome County NY. After reading this account of an interview with the county’s District Attorney, it’s obvious that racist attitudes are pretty common around there.
> 
> 
> 
> The “flying planes” BS shows that this guy, like many on the right, think it’s only “terrorism” if the person doing it is a Muslim.
> 
> If I was the terrorist‘s lawyer, I’d be BEGGING for a change of venue to Broome county for the trial. This DA seems like he has no problem with what happened.
> 
> This is not a “lone wolf” situation. It’s not a one-off. This kid is a product of racist attitudes in his community. Racist practices segregated black people into a region of Buffalo with only one decent grocery store. This terrorist had help from others and from society as a whole. And we’ve been over the extreme gun laws in America ad nauseum already…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ‘Everyone has the right to be stupid’: Broome County DA Press Conference on Buffalo Shooting
> 
> 
> The Broome County District Attorney, Michael Korchak will be holding a press conference at 1:30 PM today to discuss some of the previous history of the man that is charged in the Buffalo Tops mass …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.wivb.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> After Buffalo Massacre, “Now Is the Time to Renew the Call for Reparations”
> 
> 
> In one of this year’s deadliest mass shootings, a white supremacist opened fire Saturday on a supermarket in a predominantly Black neighborhood in Buffalo, New York, killing 10 and wounding three others. Eleven of the victims are Black. The 18-year-old suspect posted racist ideology online...
> 
> 
> 
> www.democracynow.org



From the link, _everyone has a right to be stupid?_ Actually STUPID is going to finish off the country.


----------



## Cmaier

Huntn said:


> From the link, _everyone has a right to be stupid?_ Actually STUPID is going to finish off the country.




Reminds me of the Larry David “even the stupid ones” commercial.









						Larry David shoots down crypto as the next big thing in Super Bowl ad: Watch
					

"Don't be like Larry. Don’t miss out on the next big thing," the commercial warns.




					consequence.net


----------



## JayMysteri0

SuperMatt said:


> So, when I reacted to @AG_PhamD concerning the mental health of the (alleged) terrorist in Buffalo, I want you to know a) it was not personal but b) here is why I reacted that way:
> 
> Tucker Carlson on his TV show:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tucker Carlson Says Racism Was Not The Motive In Buffalo Supermarket Shooting
> 
> 
> The Fox News host took right-wing denial to new lows to explain a self-professed white supremacist's targeting of people in a Black neighborhood.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As you can see, for this man and his millions of followers, it is never about the harm their racist ideology causes. It’s just a random crazy person.
> 
> The mental health crisis in America should encourage people to use LESS inflammatory rhetoric, not more. This person can absolutely have a mental problem AND be a bad person AND a combo of that plus a diet of rhetoric from the likes of Tucker Carlson can lead to white power terrorism.
> 
> As long mental health isn’t be used as a get-out-of-jail-free-card by the terrorist or the likes of Tucker Carlson, I’m happy to have the discussion. But I knew for a fact, having seen this dance before, that both the gun fetishists and peddlers of racist ideology would deny any culpability and say “It’s all because of mental health!!!!” Tucker Carlson certainly lived up to my expectations.



This is what I found interesting in the early time of the shooting.  At least from what I observed.   Go back and read the posts when this was being first mentioned, one thing that was mentioned... The shooter's own manifesto parroting _ucker's own words about grt.  What wasn't being mentioned heavily?  Mental illness and a need to ban guns.  Why?  Personally, I think it's because whenever ANOTHER shooter does this we do the same tired song & dance.  Especially if it's a White shooter, there ALWAYS has to be something else responsible OTHER than the shooter or guns.  Which leads to the tired talk about mental illness, which is the ONLY time there is talk about mental illness.  Otherwise mental illness is like discussing children outside the womb to pro life extremists, ...they don't give a fuck.  We can't blame guns, because... guns.  So what did everyone blame?  The shooter's STATED motives.

He's FUCKING racist.  He is NOT ashamed of this.  That is NOT mental illness.  This is chosen & it is cultivated by others for personal gain.

He spent months planning this.  He did research.  He learned from past shooters to insure that his actions & manifesto would pass on to inspire others.

Most importantly, he meant to terrorize.

You don't shoot OLDER people, if you are worried about future White Americans being supposedly replaced. 

"Legacy Americans?"  What the F?!  Somehow that's more important than the ORIGINALS, or the group IMPORTED against their wills to help make this country great with no intended benefit for them? 

GTFO.

Later on of course, we had persons trying to bring up the previous NOW dead weight excuses after that focus bled over to their culpability into what inspired the shooter, based on his own words.  Sorry.  No.  We all know the maddening truth.  This is NOT the last.

By intention.

What was the other big focus of course?  How safely the police managed to bring in a suspect who was heavily armed & armored, while they type of persons the shooter killed die at the hands of the police unarmed & unarmored for no real reason.  Sorry to all of those who need to be concerned about mental health now & failures of gun laws.  That shit ain't flying now.  Call it what it is by what all of these such incidents have in common... domestic terrorism.  If we're calling it such, we address it as such, we judge it as such.


----------



## Cmaier

JayMysteri0 said:


> This is what I found interesting in the early time of the shooting.  At least from what I observed.   Go back and read the posts when this was being first mentioned, one thing that was mentioned... The shooter's own manifesto parroting _ucker's own words about grt.  What wasn't being mentioned heavily?  Mental illness and a need to ban guns.  Why?  Personally, I think it's because whenever ANOTHER shooter does this we do the same tired song & dance.  Especially if it's a White shooter, there ALWAYS has to be something else responsible OTHER than the shooter or guns.  Which leads to the tired talk about mental illness, which is the ONLY time there is talk about mental illness.  Otherwise mental illness is like discussing children outside the womb to pro life extremists, ...they don't give a fuck.  We can't blame guns, because... guns.  So what did everyone blame?  The shooter's STATED motives.
> 
> He's FUCKING racist.  He is NOT ashamed of this.  That is NOT mental illness.  This is chosen & it is cultivated by others for personal gain.
> 
> He spent months planning this.  He did research.  He learned from past shooters to insure that his actions & manifesto would pass on to inspire others.
> 
> Most importantly, he meant to terrorize.
> 
> You don't shoot OLDER people, if you are worried about future White Americans being supposedly replaced.
> 
> "Legacy Americans?"  What the F?!  Somehow that's more important than the ORIGINALS, or the group IMPORTED against their wills to help make this country great with no intended benefit for them?
> 
> GTFO.
> 
> Later on of course, we had persons trying to bring up the previous NOW dead weight excuses after that focus bled over to their culpability into what inspired the shooter, based on his own words.  Sorry.  No.  We all know the maddening truth.  This is NOT the last.
> 
> By intention.
> 
> What was the other big focus of course?  How safely the police managed to bring in a suspect who was heavily armed & armored, while they type of persons the shooter killed die at the hands of the police unarmed & unarmored for no real reason.  Sorry to all of those who need to be concerned about mental health now & failures of gun laws.  That shit ain't flying now.  Call it what it is by what all of these such incidents have in common... domestic terrorism.  If we're calling it such, we address it as such, we judge it as such.




Speaking of racism, I‘ll just leave this here.









						Louisiana Senator: Our Maternal Death Rates Are Only Bad If You Count Black Women
					

“If you correct our population for race, we’re not as much of an outlier as it’d otherwise appear.”




					www.vanityfair.com


----------



## Herdfan

JayMysteri0 said:


> What wasn't being mentioned heavily?




You know what else wasn't mentioned heavily?  NY's strict gun laws.  He saw them as an advantage in that there would be no one to stop him.









						Buffalo Shooter Saw New York's Gun Laws As His Advantage
					

On Saturday, 18-year-old Payton Gendron allegedly carried out the mass shooting incident, which left 10 people dead and several others injured.




					www.newsweek.com


----------



## JayMysteri0

Herdfan said:


> You know what else wasn't mentioned heavily?  NY's strict gun laws.  He saw them as an advantage in that there would be no one to stop him.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Buffalo Shooter Saw New York's Gun Laws As His Advantage
> 
> 
> On Saturday, 18-year-old Payton Gendron allegedly carried out the mass shooting incident, which left 10 people dead and several others injured.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com



I apologize for being too subtle, but I was covering that with...



> and a need to ban guns. Why? Personally, I think it's because whenever ANOTHER shooter does this we do the same tired song & dance. Especially if it's a White shooter, there ALWAYS has to be something else responsible OTHER than the shooter or guns.




It will ALWAYS be something else's fault, except the White shooter.  If it's a PoC being killed by the police though, it's ALWAYS only ONE reason, the victim.  I wait _impatiently_ wait for the time the likes of _ucker & r' friends have run the gamut of excuses, and they are only left with blaming the victims for being shot.


----------



## Cmaier

JayMysteri0 said:


> I apologize for being too subtle, but I was covering that with...
> 
> 
> 
> It will ALWAYS be something else's fault, except the White shooter.  If it's a PoC being killed by the police though, it's ALWAYS only ONE reason, the victim.  I wait _impatiently_ wait for the time the likes of _ucker & r' friends have run the gamut of excuses, and they are only left with blaming the victims for being shot.




The playbook:

18 years old: white = teenager.  black = man.
perpetrator: white = mental health issues or bad upbringing led him to life of crime. black = thug
victim: white = innocent victim. Black = thug


----------



## AG_PhamD

SuperMatt said:


> So, when I reacted to @AG_PhamD concerning the mental health of the (alleged) terrorist in Buffalo, I want you to know a) it was not personal but b) here is why I reacted that way:
> 
> Tucker Carlson on his TV show:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tucker Carlson Says Racism Was Not The Motive In Buffalo Supermarket Shooting
> 
> 
> The Fox News host took right-wing denial to new lows to explain a self-professed white supremacist's targeting of people in a Black neighborhood.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As you can see, for this man and his millions of followers, it is never about the harm their racist ideology causes. It’s just a random crazy person.
> 
> The mental health crisis in America should encourage people to use LESS inflammatory rhetoric, not more. This person can absolutely have a mental problem AND be a bad person AND a combo of that plus a diet of rhetoric from the likes of Tucker Carlson can lead to white power terrorism.
> 
> As long mental health isn’t be used as a get-out-of-jail-free-card by the terrorist or the likes of Tucker Carlson, I’m happy to have the discussion. But I knew for a fact, having seen this dance before, that both the gun fetishists and peddlers of racist ideology would deny any culpability and say “It’s all because of mental health!!!!” Tucker Carlson certainly lived up to my expectations.




I agree this is an absurd take and a total deflection. I’d have to see the full context, but it sounds a lot like defending white supremacists. 

I’d tell Tucker the basically what I’ve been saying, it’s possible that he was both mentally ill and radicalized by white supremacists. Even if it’s accepted his mental illness could have made him more susceptible to radicalization, it does not necessarily preclude him from being responsible for his actions nor the reality white supremacists pose a danger by disseminating hate, even if they’re not advocating violence.


----------



## Yoused

AG_PhamD said:


> Even if it’s accepted his mental illness could have made him more susceptible to radicalization, it does not necessarily preclude him from being responsible for his actions



There is a vexing philosophical issue to deal with here. If I tell you a thing that I understand to be true but you are certain that I am mistaken, can you accuse me of lying? I am not deliberately trying to mislead you, merely stating my understanding of reality, which does not comport with yours.

The local TV station play reruns of _Gunsmoke_ six days a week, from which we learn that people being killed is a normal way for problems to be resolved. Most of us know that reality is not Matt Dillon's Dodge City, but some of us either fail to grasp that or feel like maybe we all ought to strive for that ideal.

Because quite frankly, what me have is full of broken, and going back to an easier mode of B&W thinking and snuffing out the bad guys has an atavistic appeal to it. And doing things the just and hard way is, well, hard.

My position has always been that disparaging a terrorist (and, seriously, he did commit an act of unalloyed terrorism) is ultimately counterproductive, because it allows us to new that person as evil, end-of-story, when the most useful thing we can do is to see the terrorist as a person, explore their driving motivations and address the causes of the terrorism at a root level. Except, that is hard.


----------



## SuperMatt

Yoused said:


> My position has always been that disparaging a terrorist (and, seriously, he did commit an act of unalloyed terrorism) is ultimately counterproductive, because it allows us to new that person as evil, end-of-story, when the most useful thing we can do is to see the terrorist as a person, explore their driving motivations and address the causes of the terrorism at a root level. Except, that is hard.



I agree; it is hard. I want this person to go to prison for the rest of his life without parole.

After the 9/11 attacks, at some point we had discussions about how to prevent radicalization of Muslim youths around the world. I think it’s well past time to talk about preventing radicalization of white Christian youths in America.

I believe this terrorist is the product of a strain of racism in our society. It used to be large groups of white people holding lynchings. Now the same types of leaders who led the KKK in the past are encouraging unstable youths with the same ideas prevalent during the days of frequent lynchings.

Trump said the “quiet” part out loud, and instead of being shunned, was given 4 years in the White House. How do we make it once again unacceptable to grab women by the p***y, call Mexicans rapists, ban Muslims from America, build a wall, steal kids from their parents and lock them in cages? Until we figure that out, it’s a very short bridge to cross from those ideas to mass murder of minorities. Unfortunately, I don’t see the right-wing crazies being sidelined by their party. In fact, they are becoming stronger. I think defeating them and their hate is key to preventing more racist terror attacks.


----------



## JayMysteri0

Yoused said:


> There is a vexing philosophical issue to deal with here. If I tell you a thing that I understand to be true but you are certain that I am mistaken, can you accuse me of lying? I am not deliberately trying to mislead you, merely stating my understanding of reality, which does not comport with yours.
> 
> The local TV station play reruns of _Gunsmoke_ six days a week, from which we learn that people being killed is a normal way for problems to be resolved. Most of us know that reality is not Matt Dillon's Dodge City, but some of us either fail to grasp that or feel like maybe we all ought to strive for that ideal.
> 
> Because quite frankly, what me have is full of broken, and going back to an easier mode of B&W thinking and snuffing out the bad guys has an atavistic appeal to it. And doing things the just and hard way is, well, hard.
> 
> My position has always been that disparaging a terrorist (and, seriously, he did commit an act of unalloyed terrorism) is ultimately counterproductive, because it allows us to new that person as evil, end-of-story, when the most useful thing we can do is to see the terrorist as a person, explore their driving motivations and address the causes of the terrorism at a root level. Except, that is hard.



On the flip side of that I believe that "mental illness" has become the deflection of choice of the enablers of such behavior.  The likes of _ucker & Stefanik who espouse grt for personal gain, don't want to be held responsible.  So when someone does act ( AGAIN ) on such rhetoric, THAT person has issues.  NOT the persons who repeat such harmful filth, waiting for it to inspire the next domestic terrorist.  We don't have to look any further than those on 1/6 who were supposedly engaged in "legitimate political discourse" that also happened to kill a police officer that they greatly support.  THOSE people supposedly do NOT have an issues, while if you get caught driving your car into a crowd in Charlottesville, that's crazy.  It seems more & more often that what's become the defining line of 'mental illness' with this crowd is whether you get caught, or the blowback makes the fellow racists look bad.

If a particular group of people get bent out of shape & inspired because of international terrorists.  If a particular group is quick to lump all protests as riots, and show more concern for storefront property over human lives.  I'm sorry when they themselves commit the same acts as those 'international' terrorists, or do things with the intent of terrorizing a group of United States citizens...  They get called domestic terrorists, and it's counter productive to couch it any other way.  Or to put it in the words of that group, "F their feelings".  The motivations are simple.  They've given into ginned up fear, and decided that lashing out at their fellow citizens because of skin color is in their best interests.  It's something taught, learned, & cultivated.  Otherwise it looks like one part of a particular race that wants to claim superiority, also seems to be more susceptible to bouts of repeated mass mental illness over other races in the country.


----------



## AG_PhamD

Yoused said:


> There is a vexing philosophical issue to deal with here. If I tell you a thing that I understand to be true but you are certain that I am mistaken, can you accuse me of lying? I am not deliberately trying to mislead you, merely stating my understanding of reality, which does not comport with yours.



I suppose there could be a lot of philosophical answers to those questions, but practically speaking if you believe you’re telling the truth, then you’re not lying. If you are indeed  incorrect, then you are mistaken. If you’re mistaken, I could call you a liar, but then I too would be mistaken. Of course everyone has their own perception of reality. 

I’m not entirely sure I understand what you’re getting at- it’s early and my brain is still booting up. Are we speaking in the context of the perpetrator or people like Tucker Carlson? 



Yoused said:


> My position has always been that disparaging a terrorist (and, seriously, he did commit an act of unalloyed terrorism) is ultimately counterproductive, because it allows us to new that person as evil, end-of-story, when the most useful thing we can do is to see the terrorist as a person, explore their driving motivations and address the causes of the terrorism at a root level. Except, that is hard.




I absolutely agree. When someone commits a heinous crime most people  naturally dehumanize the perpetrator. Understanding the motivations, background, influences, thought processes, beliefs, etc of the perpetrator as you mentioned is important from a law enforcement, academic, and medical/psychological standpoint in understanding what happened and why, and of course how to identify and prevent these tragedies in the future. But I think it’s also important for the general public to be aware of these facets not only to potentially identify potentially dangerous people, but especially in the context of school shooters and kids, how things like bullying, social rejection, etc can affect others, and ultimately end up hurting everyone. 

———

I think another problem we have here is the amount of hyperbole used by the media, politicians, and even in regular conversation- this applies to both sides of the isle. I‘be seen countless (news) “news” segments, posts, etc where they explicitly or implicitly express that all republicans / conservatives are racist, sexist, homophobic, white supremacists, etc or that they’re all evangelical Christians. While it’s certainly true there are problematic ideologies ranging from mainstream but racist to radical to extremist on the right, I don’t think that is an remotely accurate representation of the majority of republicans. And just because someone opposes abortion doesn’t mean they’re sexist, just because someone wants the border secured doesn’t mean they’re xenophobic. The problem with this broad brush stereotyping is it creates little-no differentiation between normal people (who democrats may disagree with) and the truly dangerous individuals. In that sense there is no in stigma between two, thus becoming a radical on the right is just as socially unacceptable as not being a non-radical on the right. 

On the other hand, the Right has its own use of toxic hyperbole, like much of what Tucker Carlson or Sean Hannity has to say. Or the general talking point that the left wants to destroy “American values” and America from the inside out. That any attempt to enact legislation to minimize gun violence or extremism is actually an attempt to remove your civil liberties. That the left specifically want to interfere with religion. That the immigration situation is an attempt to flood your neighborhood with democrats to take political control of the country entirely (despite the fact many Latinos actually end up being conservative). That COVID restrictions are solely some sort of power play than a public health matter. This of course riles up their viewers and some interpret that there is some sort of existential crisis occurring in America due to the opposite party. 

We all perceive how “divided” America is- but how much of that is real and how much is theoretical? On a day to day basis the overwhelming majority of democrats and republicans coexist just fine within families, friendships, neighborhoods, workplaces, etc. The balance of political power changes with every election, yet for most of us, politics have relatively little impact on our life.  But when you turn on the news the amount of toxic propaganda is endless. 90% of FOX, CNN, and MSNBC content is basically programming viewers to hate the left/right. It’s really just disgusting the fear and intolerance and anger for our neighbors that is manufactured for the sake of political power. The powers at be would rather try to consolidate power and see the country torn apart.

The reality is most Americans fall in the middle of the political spectrum, whether that be independents, moderates, center-left dems, or center right republicans. The way the news presents things makes it seem like the country is 50/50 right/left and that everyone on the opposing end is at the far end of the spectrum. But the media narratives a seem to be designed to promote outrage and drive people further left or further right. 

So with Tucker Carlson and the Buffalo shooting, I don’t subscribe to the idea he is “responsible” for inspiring the crime. He never said to kill anyone, the shooter never referenced him in his lengthy manifesto and cited he was radicalized online, and I believe people are ultimately responsible for his/her own actions. What Tucker is guilty of is promoting this emotionally charged environment often based on exaggeration and half truths that promotes craziness like this to occur. Not all hosts are equal in their toxicity, but Tucker is among the worst. 

I can only anticipate this antagonism will only get worse as time progresses.


----------



## SuperMatt

AG_PhamD said:


> So with Tucker Carlson and the Buffalo shooting, I don’t subscribe to the idea he is “responsible” for inspiring the crime. He never said to kill anyone, the shooter never referenced him in his lengthy manifesto and cited he was radicalized online, and I believe people are ultimately responsible for his/her own actions. What Tucker is guilty of is promoting this emotionally charged environment often based on exaggeration and half truths that promotes craziness like this to occur. Not all hosts are equal in their toxicity, but Tucker is among the worst.



Well, I know it’s a terrible idea to ever invoke Nazis in any argument, but…



> “The way Hitler worked was he would make these pronouncements, and people would go off and figure out, what did he mean? How are we going to do this?” says White. “You could work towards the Führer by being innovative and ruthless.”
> 
> In other words, rather than giving explicit orders to each member of the Nazi party, Hitler made numerous statements vilifying Jewish people and declaring the need to exterminate them.



Does that sound familiar?









						The First Moments of Hitler's Final Solution
					

When Hitler solidified his plan to exterminate Jews – and why it matters 75 years later




					www.smithsonianmag.com
				




And people were sounding the alarm bells about Carlson before this terrorist attack. This article is lengthy, but I found it worth a read.









						What to Know About Tucker Carlson’s Rise
					

A Times examination of the host’s career and singular influence at Fox News shows how his trajectory traces the transformation of American conservatism itself.




					www.nytimes.com
				



(paywall removed)


----------



## Herdfan

SuperMatt said:


> I believe this terrorist is the product of a strain of racism in our society.




Which, in my opinion, is brought on by our politicians trying to create divisions between us.  And not just race, but almost anything they can use to divide us.


----------



## JayMysteri0

Herdfan said:


> Which, in my opinion, is brought on by our politicians trying to create divisions between us.  And not just race, but almost anything they can use to divide us.



Which politicians specifically & how?  

 

Not certain media personalities who've been documented for doing this for years?


----------



## DT

JFC.









						19 children, 2 teachers killed in Texas elementary school shooting
					

An 18-year-old suspect was fatally wounded by law enforcement officers, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott said.




					www.nbcnews.com
				













						Gunman Who Killed 19 Kids at Texas Elementary School Shot ‘Whoever Was in His Way’
					

The 18-year-old shooter walked into Robb Elementary School with a handgun.



					www.thedailybeast.com
				




The original report indicated 2 dead (teacher and student) but these later reports are sounding much worse.


https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1529196383399452673/


----------



## fooferdoggie

If Texas only had more guns. thoughts and prayers as usual.


----------



## GermanSuplex

Gross. The frequency of these things is not alarming to enough people, it seems. I’m at a loss.


----------



## Citysnaps

*14 elementary school children killed, along with a teacher.*

Yet many still cling to their no-limits 2nd amendment rights being far more important than dead school children, believing "guns are not the problem." For sure they'll offer an abundance of thoughts and prayers to the dead childrens' parents.

*So sick of selfish me-me-me people who only care about themselves.*


----------



## GermanSuplex

We did nothing after Sandy Hook, we did nothing after Parkland, there’s probably been another dozen smaller, forgotten school shootings since, plus the other non-school mass shootings. I don’t think enough people believe it could happen in their hometown.


----------



## The-Real-Deal82

citypix said:


> *14 elementary school children killed, along with a teacher.*
> 
> Yet many still cling to their no-limits 2nd amendment rights being far more important than dead school children, believing "guns are not the problem." For sure they'll offer an abundance of thoughts and prayers to the dead childrens' parents.
> 
> *So sick of selfish me-me-me people who only care about themselves.*




This story just popped up on the news here and looks horrific. 

I tend to have the opinion that guns as objects aren’t the problem, but they are the last things you want in the hands of people in a society where there is clearly a desire to commit mass murder on a regular basis. America seems to have a disproportionate amount of individuals who have hatred for others and it’s not something you see with the same regularity in other developed countries. It’s always spouted as ‘Land of the Free’, yet people often actively walk around doing everyday things whilst armed for the unexpected. It’s a dreadful indictment of a society that accepts violence and has deep social problems that lead to such acts. 

I know a lot of Americans will laugh at us in Europe because we don’t have lots of guns to defend ourselves, but it’s certainly not a worry I have ever had or would want my children to have. Those kids in Texas are the same age as my children and went into school to be murdered. We just don’t have things like that happening here and the first and last happened here way back in 1996. We had the guts to do something about it.


----------



## Citysnaps

GermanSuplex said:


> We did nothing after Sandy Hook, we did nothing after Parkland, there’s probably been another dozen smaller, forgotten school shootings since, plus the other non-school mass shootings. I don’t think enough people believe it could happen in their hometown.




And 60 people killed with 400 wounded attending a music festival in Las Vegas five years ago from a guy in a hotel room with an arsenal of weapons.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

fooferdoggie said:


> If Texas only had more guns. thoughts and prayers as usual.




If this happened in a liberal state then 1,400 of the 600 students would have been killed.  It says so in the Bible.  14  isn’t even worth mentioning.  This story is a triumph for the 2nd amendment.


----------



## GermanSuplex

I just listened to Texas Governor Abbott try to give a press briefing about this. Yikes… and they think Biden has an issue?


----------



## shadow puppet

Sigh.  Yet once again, nothing will be done.


----------



## Eric

Americans: "What can we do about all of this gun violence"

Republicans about to be elected in the midterms and get the keys back to everything: "We'll loosen all restrictions"

Americans: "Fuck yeah!"

Rinse, repeat.


----------



## shadow puppet

Death toll has now risen to 18 kids, 3 adults.


----------



## GermanSuplex

Hard to say how much our political vitriol has to do with these things, but it certainly can’t be helping. 21 people dead from one lunatic. At a school. And it’s not the first, second or tenth times it’s happened. The reaction from gun owners I know is that it’s too bad, but has nothing to do with them or their guns.

And these are the reasonable people I know.


----------



## Eric

GermanSuplex said:


> Hard to say how much our political vitriol has to do with these things, but it certainly can’t be helping. 21 people dead from one lunatic. At a school. And it’s not the first, second or tenth times it’s happened. The reaction from gun owners I know is that it’s too bad, but has nothing to do with them or their guns.
> 
> And these are the reasonable people I know.



I'm of the opinion that vitriol is needed, what's sad is nobody will listen. We make it as easy as possible for these psychos to slaughter as many children as possible with the most lethal firearms. We should be fucking outraged, every last one of us, at the ease of access for these weapons and the lack of political will to do anything about it. At best, the result will be more weapons sold after another round of thoughts and prayers.


----------



## Joe

This country is so ghetto.


----------



## Citysnaps

Golden State Warriors head coach Steve Kerr on today's slaughter. He's pissed.


----------



## shadow puppet

"This only happens in this country and nowhere else. Nowhere else do little kids go to school thinking that they might be shot that day." 

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1529219575694430214/


----------



## mac_in_tosh

The second amendment (emphasis mine): *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.

The gun madness in the U.S. is based on a distortion of the second amendment led by gun manufacturers and enabled by corrupt politicians.


----------



## Eric

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1529253772362276869/


----------



## shadow puppet

Eric said:


> At best, the result will be more weapons sold after another round of thoughts and prayers.



As far as I'm concerned, people can stick their thoughts & prayers up their arse.


----------



## SuperMatt

Republicans BLOCKED background checks that 90% of Americans wanted. Even 60% of Texans opposed the state’s 2021 ”you don’t need a permit” gun law.

Abbott was bragging about that law until these kids died and now he pretends to give a ? He doesn’t care how many kids die as long as he stays in power. 

The blood of these children is on their hands. They had a chance to do something and decided to side with the NRA instead of America’s children. If anybody votes for the GOP, they are voting for the murder of innocent children.


----------



## SuperMatt

More innocent children. Dead. Because of guns.



			https://www.sunherald.com/news/nation-world/national/article261714007.html
		


A non-partisan proposal for solving the problem:









						Opinion | How to Reduce Shootings (Published 2017)
					

We could bring down the death toll caused by guns if we are smarter about how we regulate them.



					www.nytimes.com
				



(paywall removed)


----------



## JayMysteri0

Eric said:


> I'm of the opinion that vitriol is needed, what's sad is nobody will listen. We make it as easy as possible for these psychos to slaughter as many children as possible with the most lethal firearms. We should be fucking outraged, every last one of us, at the ease of access for these weapons and the lack of political will to do anything about it. At best, the result will be more weapons sold after another round of thoughts and prayers.



You are right.  At this point we need all the vitriol we can muster.  Because everything else has failed.  This shit won't stop sadly, until certain people have to endure the pain so many others have had to.  Which of course is why they shield themselves.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1529273190723223555/

Everyone else gets some "thoughts & prayers" and good luck out there.

Perhaps since one party has decided to chuck decorum for so many things, perhaps it's time for everyone else to chuck decorum when it comes to this.  Heap that vitriol on those who are going to be attending that NRA gathering also in Texas.  Make them cry like so many about "cancel culture" and wokeness and whatever the fuck else.  But make them cry.

Because all that crying won't be anything close to what so many families have had to go thru.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1529296898317860864/


----------



## DT

The-Real-Deal82 said:


> I tend to have the opinion that guns as objects aren’t the problem, but they are the last things you want in the hands of people in a society where there is clearly a desire to commit mass murder on a regular basis.




I'd suggest it's the reverse, or maybe the inverse[?] of what you said (which doesn't invalidate it), that being:

I believe there's a non-trivial amount of innate anger, violence, in our species, look at the knife attacks in your neck of the woods - and to be very clear:  that  just to illustrate that conflict exists and human beings can be violent, but more to your point, by giving them easy access to a much more lethal mechanism, it significantly compounds the issue.

I'd also say this:

There's an underlying "gun culture" in the US, it reinforces guns as a response, that guns empower you to take action, they provide a false sense of control that leads to be people being more confrontational. So many gun owners fetishize their firearms, they love boasting about their collections, displaying them, talking about them - as a matter of wanting one for defense and quietly owning it, sure, I myself am an owner.

I've seen a number of PhDs in the psych space speak on the matter, and they believe there's a sort of "violence empowerment" with gun ownership - when people carp about, "Well, cars or knifes can kill people" those mechanisms don't motivate, because they have a purpose that's not about killing, they're ultitiarian, or transportation. For the sick individuals that needs that extra push to do something horrific, guns are a conduit to thinking that killing/violence is the solution (beyond just the simple mechanics of how lethal a single person is with an automatic firearm).


----------



## fooferdoggie

Congressman Skewers Ted Cruz's Response To Texas Shooting: 'You Are Useless'​








						Congressman Skewers Ted Cruz's Response To Texas Shooting: 'You Are Useless'
					

"You care about a fetus but you will let our children get slaughtered," Rep. Ruben Gallego tweeted at the Texas senator.




					www.huffpost.com


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

JayMysteri0 said:


> You are right.  At this point we need all the vitriol we can muster.  Because everything else has failed.  This shit won't stop sadly, until certain people have to endure the pain so many others have had to.  Which of course is why they shield themselves.
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1529273190723223555/
> 
> Everyone else gets some "thoughts & prayers" and good luck out there.
> 
> Perhaps since one party has decided to chuck decorum for so many things, perhaps it's time for everyone else to chuck decorum when it comes to this.  Heap that vitriol on those who are going to be attending that NRA gathering also in Texas.  Make them cry like so many about "cancel culture" and wokeness and whatever the fuck else.  But make them cry.
> 
> Because all that crying won't be anything close to what so many families have had to go thru.
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1529296898317860864/









TL;DW…. The AR-15 isn’t considered high power.  Gun nuts want it because they want what the military has.  The military is about to switch to a new rifle that is far deadlier.  The civilian version is already available.  The main reason it hasn’t made an appearance at these shootings is because it’s currently $8,000.  Once the military fully adopts it the civilian price will greatly decrease.


----------



## Citysnaps

DT said:


> 've seen a number of PhDs in the psych space speak on the matter, and they believe there's a sort of "violence empowerment" with gun ownership - when people carp about, "Well, cars or knifes can kill people" those mechanisms don't motivate, because they have a purpose that's not about killing, they're ultitiarian, or transportation. For the sick individuals that needs that extra push to do something horrific, guns are a conduit to thinking that killing/violence is the solution (beyond just the simple mechanics of how lethal a single person is with an automatic firearm).




Spot on. Something that I've noticed from some gun owners is a certain pride about their ability to own assault weapons. And feeling smug that nobody can do anything about it, while knowing  assault weapons are the instruments that kill innocent people in these shootings.  I find that smugness particularly disturbing. Feels sociopathic.


----------



## SuperMatt

citypix said:


> Spot on. Something that I've noticed from some gun owners is a certain pride about their ability to own assault weapons. And feeling smug that nobody can do anything about it, while knowing  assault weapons are the instruments that kill innocent people in these shootings.  I find that smugness particularly disturbing. Feels sociopathic.



Oh yeah, they brag about teaching their kids how to use the guns too. They don’t see how seriously messed up it is.

Do you know the best way to increase your chances of dying from a gunshot wound? Have a gun in your home. The statistics don’t lie. Having a gun, supposedly meant to keep you safe, literally makes you LESS safe.



> Data from a US mortality follow-back survey were analyzed to determine whether having a firearm in the home increases the risk of a violent death in the home and whether risk varies by storage practice, type of gun, or number of guns in the home. Those persons with guns in the home were at greater risk than those without guns in the home of dying from a homicide in the home (adjusted odds ratio = 1.9, 95% confidence interval: 1.1, 3.4). They were also at greater risk of dying from a firearm homicide, but risk varied by age and whether the person was living with others at the time of death. The risk of dying from a suicide in the home was greater for males in homes with guns than for males without guns in the home (adjusted odds ratio = 10.4, 95% confidence interval: 5.8, 18.9). Persons with guns in the home were also more likely to have died from suicide committed with a firearm than from one committed by using a different method (adjusted odds ratio = 31.1, 95% confidence interval: 19.5, 49.6). Results show that regardless of storage practice, type of gun, or number of firearms in the home, having a gun in the home was associated with an increased risk of firearm homicide and firearm suicide in the home.












						Guns in the home and risk of a violent death in the home: findings from a national study - PubMed
					

Data from a US mortality follow-back survey were analyzed to determine whether having a firearm in the home increases the risk of a violent death in the home and whether risk varies by storage practice, type of gun, or number of guns in the home. Those persons with guns in the home were at...




					pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
				












						The health risk of having a gun in the home | MinnPost
					

Having a gun in your home significantly increases your risk of death — and that of your spouse and children.




					www.minnpost.com
				




If your reason to have a gun is to keep yourself safe, you should know it actually does the opposite.


----------



## DT

citypix said:


> Spot on. Something that I've noticed from some gun owners is a certain pride about their ability to own assault weapons. And feeling smug that nobody can do anything about it, while knowing  assault weapons are the instruments that kill innocent people in these shootings.  I find that smugness particularly disturbing. Feels sociopathic.




There's a thread on MR, show / pics of your guns, and sure, it's all about "collecting" and just for "target practice", but the way some of the pics are shot, you can feel the weird reverence, "Behold!  My devices for killing!", I mean you can feel the boners right through the screen.


----------



## Eric

DT said:


> *There's a thread on MR, show / pics of your guns*, and sure, it's all about "collecting" and just for "target practice", but the way some of the pics are shot, you can feel the weird reverence, "Behold!  My devices for killing!", I mean you can feel the boners right through the screen.



Just don't talk about LGBTQ topics









						MacRumors LGBT+ article policy - disabling/deleting comments
					

So I first noticed this yesterday with the articles about Apple's Pride month-related Apple Watch offerings.  An article with rumors about upcoming releases for this was fully unlocked for comments. A second article about the actual releases had comments disabled immediately - with no reasoning...




					forums.macrumors.com


----------



## Runs For Fun

Eric said:


> Just don't talk about LGBTQ topics
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MacRumors LGBT+ article policy - disabling/deleting comments
> 
> 
> So I first noticed this yesterday with the articles about Apple's Pride month-related Apple Watch offerings.  An article with rumors about upcoming releases for this was fully unlocked for comments. A second article about the actual releases had comments disabled immediately - with no reasoning...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> forums.macrumors.com



Lazy moderation








						MacRumors LGBT+ article policy - disabling/deleting comments
					

In my opinion it is mod's wanting an easy life not having to spend time dealing with a topic that could create troublesome posts.  Disable comments = Easy mod life




					forums.macrumors.com


----------



## Runs For Fun

Aaaand of course, guess what? Sad this needs to be said









						PolitiFact - No, the Uvalde school shooting wasn’t a false flag
					

Eighteen children and one teacher were killed in a shooting at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde County, Texas, on May 24




					www.politifact.com


----------



## fooferdoggie

Runs For Fun said:


> Aaaand of course, guess what? Sad this needs to be said
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PolitiFact - No, the Uvalde school shooting wasn’t a false flag
> 
> 
> Eighteen children and one teacher were killed in a shooting at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde County, Texas, on May 24
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.politifact.com



the thing is this has never caused guns to be taken but it has caused massive gun sales so the stupid argument is very baseless.


----------



## DT

Yep, I started reading through the comments of that watch band thread, and reported at least one:





I don't know that my report on its own did anything, but I'm sure it wasn't the only one.  I assumed, they would remove the offender from the thread and/or initiate a couple of day ban - but nope, they wound up punishing the people who wanted to participate in a positive way.


----------



## Eric

DT said:


> Yep, I started reading through the comments of that watch band thread, and reported at least one:
> 
> View attachment 14346
> 
> I don't know that my report on its own did anything, but I'm sure it wasn't the only one.  I assumed, they would remove the offender from the thread and/or initiate a couple of day ban - but nope, they wound up punishing the people who wanted to participate in a positive way.



Can you link the thread?


----------



## DT

It looks like it's reopened!









						Apple to Launch New Apple Watch Pride Bands as Soon as This Week
					

Update: Since this story was published, Mark Gurman has clarified that he was referring only to new Apple Watch Pride bands, not a new...




					www.macrumors.com
				




I think that's the one where I reported that asshat.

Yep, that was it:





And the same fuckers using the laughing reaction still have it posted and none are banned.  Nice.


----------



## GermanSuplex

Greg Abott is giving a sterile press conference and is really hammering home mental health, but it’s a flimsy facade to not talk about guns. If it was sincere, it would come across a lot better.

*Was that Beto O’Rourke making a scene? This press conference is going to make the news cycle…


----------



## Eric

Wait, what?









						Guns are banned during Trump's upcoming speech at the NRA conference
					

The Secret Service is taking control of the hall during Trump's speech in Houston on Friday and is prohibiting attendees from having firearms and other weapons, according to the gun group.




					www.npr.org


----------



## Renzatic

GermanSuplex said:


> Greg Abott is giving a sterile press conference and is really hammering home mental health, but it’s a flimsy facade to not talk about guns. If it was sincere, it would come across a lot better.
> 
> *Was that Beto O’Rourke making a scene? This press conference is going to make the news cycle…




I just saw that while walking by the TV. I have no idea what he said, but I heard someone say something like "you're sick for making this a political issue, you sumbitch" in response, so it's pretty safe to assume that he mentioned gun control.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

GermanSuplex said:


> Greg Abott is giving a sterile press conference and is really hammering home mental health, but it’s a flimsy facade to not talk about guns. If it was sincere, it would come across a lot better.
> 
> *Was that Beto O’Rourke making a scene? This press conference is going to make the news cycle…




If the Republicans ran a mental health institution they’d put 2 unstable people in a room, hand one guy a gun and tell them the other guy is out to get him, walk out of the room and then claim the shooting was absolutely not their fault.


----------



## SuperMatt

GermanSuplex said:


> Greg Abott is giving a sterile press conference and is really hammering home mental health, but it’s a flimsy facade to not talk about guns. If it was sincere, it would come across a lot better.
> 
> *Was that Beto O’Rourke making a scene? This press conference is going to make the news cycle…




Here’s something the Governor was very sincere about yesterday:









						Hours after Uvalde school shooting, Gov. Greg Abbott attended a fundraiser 300 miles away
					

A spokesperson for Abbott said he had previously committed to the event but all campaign-related activities are postponed until further notice.




					www.texastribune.org
				






> Gov. Greg Abbott attended a fundraiser for his reelection campaign Tuesday night in East Texas, hours after a gunman killed 19 children and two adults at an elementary school over 300 miles away in Uvalde.




Sure, he’s really making the safety of children a priority...


----------



## SuperMatt

Eric said:


> Wait, what?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Guns are banned during Trump's upcoming speech at the NRA conference
> 
> 
> The Secret Service is taking control of the hall during Trump's speech in Houston on Friday and is prohibiting attendees from having firearms and other weapons, according to the gun group.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.npr.org



Hmm, they were opposed to gun-free zones at schools, because they supposedly make things more dangerous. But they impose them when it comes to THEIR OWN safety... Because they KNOW it works.

They are child murderers, one and all. They know there are things that can be done that will A) Help and B) Are widely popular with Americans. Yet they do nothing.

Fuck them and their “Democrats are pedophiles” bullshit. THEY are the ones who are responsible for killing little kids. Tell Satan to keep digging hell deeper because we need the worst place possible for these gun-humping politicians to spend eternity.


----------



## SuperMatt

Keystone Cops didn’t help....

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1529334366253350912/


----------



## DT

SuperMatt said:


> Keystone Cops didn’t help....





From that Twitter thread:

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1529400995075194880/

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1529391491554107392/

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1529442936806641664/


----------



## fooferdoggie

Eric said:


> Wait, what?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Guns are banned during Trump's upcoming speech at the NRA conference
> 
> 
> The Secret Service is taking control of the hall during Trump's speech in Houston on Friday and is prohibiting attendees from having firearms and other weapons, according to the gun group.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.npr.org



that usual.


----------



## SuperMatt

Greg Abbott submits his entry for biggest asshole in America:



> “I hate to say it, but there are more people who are shot every weekend in Chicago than there are in schools in Texas,” Gov. Abbott said when asked about gun laws in other states.






> Gov. Abbott said that the gunman was reportedly a high school dropout with no known history of mental health problems. He then said: “We have a problem with mental health illness in this community."




Too bad the tree missed by a few inches and he only ended up in a wheelchair.


----------



## SuperMatt

Good to know far-right judges are working hard to make sure gun sales cannot be limited in any way.



			https://www.nytimes.com/live/2022/05/25/us/shooting-robb-elementary-uvalde/appeals-courts-have-rejected-bans-of-gun-sales-to-those-under-21?smid=url-share
		




> A divided three-judge panel of the court, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, in San Francisco, ruled that the Second Amendment did not permit the age limit and that 18-year-olds have a constitutional right to buy such weapons.






> Saul Cornell, a historian at Fordham University, said both majority opinions had overlooked important historical evidence.
> 
> “Anyone who knows anything about founding-era law and looked at the standard treatises would understand that there was no category of young adult under Anglo-American law,” he said, summarizing an essay he published last year in The Yale Law & Policy Review. “Anyone under 21 was an ‘infant.’ Minors were legally disabled in the eyes of the law.”


----------



## Eric

Heartbroken Republicans...

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1529546802789093376/


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

‘No Way To Prevent This,’ Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens
					

UVALDE, TX—In the hours following a violent rampage in Texas in which a lone attacker killed at least 21 individuals and injured several others, citizens living in the only country where this kind of mass killing routinely occurs reportedly concluded Tuesday that there was no way to prevent the...




					www.theonion.com
				




Also just noticed that every article on the front page of the Onion is the same except each one is about a different mass shooting.


----------



## Eric

Imagine the lives that could've been saved if Republicans were this passionate about preventing 18 year olds from buying assault weapons without question.






Bravo, Beto!
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1529519488391069697/


----------



## AG_PhamD

What a horrific event. I had hoped Sandy Hook would be a once in a lifetime event but here we are again with an someone who is technically an adult massacring a large number of young children. You can’t get much worse than that.

I will reiterate my point from the last major mass shooting, why do we allow 18 year olds to buy guns, especially AR-15 style assault rifles. The age really should be at least 21, preferably 24. It wouldn’t prevent all of the problems, but would likely cut down the problems.

I know we’re still unraveling the events and precise timeline but I’m a bit concerned about how this all happened. It sounds like the police were chasing him, allowed him to flee onto school property, he somehow managed to get into the building, lock himself in a room, take out essentially a class full of children, and wasn’t killed until the backup came- which ended up being a Border Patrol agent. I commend the reportedly off-duty BP agent who killed the perpatrator, evidently being wounded in the process. I’m amazed that that the lines of communication exist for the BP to respond so efficiently to something outside their normal purview (like a school shooting), that’s excellent to see. But my question is where were police that apparently were either literally chasing the tail or chasing moments behind the gunman?

My condolences go out to those affected by this atrocity. Their lives will never be the same, especially the victims classmates and teachers- who are also victims in this. But I think we should also recognize the first responders who had to deal with what I can only imagine to be a crime scene no one should ever have to see.

I’ve worked with a Sandy Hook first responder (they were a patient at the psych hospital I work at) and I can’t even begin to describe the trauma they have been through. Just hearing about the aftermath they experienced was traumatic for me and the other providers on the treatment team. First responders see awful things routinely, but I don’t think anything can prepare a person for a classroom full of massacred children. What they dealt with is an unimaginably horrific thing to have to live with. And I have the deepest empathy and respect for anyone who has had to see this type of thing. It is not something anyone should ever have to witness.

And in a cruelest of twists, apparently many of the first responders were parents of children in this school. At least one of their children was killed. Horrible.


----------



## SuperMatt

AG_PhamD said:


> What a horrific event. I had hoped Sandy Hook would be a once in a lifetime event but here we are again with an someone who is technically an adult massacring a large number of young children. You can’t get much worse than that.
> 
> I will reiterate my point from the last major mass shooting, why do we allow 18 year olds to buy guns, especially AR-15 style assault rifles. The age really should be at least 21, preferably 24. It wouldn’t prevent all of the problems, but would likely cut down the problems.
> 
> I know we’re still unraveling the events and precise timeline but I’m a bit concerned about how this all happened. It sounds like the police were chasing him, allowed him to flee onto school property, he somehow managed to get into the building, lock himself in a room, take out essentially a class full of children, and wasn’t killed until the backup came- which ended up being a Border Patrol agent. I commend the reportedly off-duty BP agent who killed the perpatrator, evidently being wounded in the process. I’m amazed that that the lines of communication exist for the BP to respond so efficiently to something outside their normal purview (like a school shooting), that’s excellent to see. But my question is where were police that apparently were either literally chasing the tail or chasing moments behind the gunman?
> 
> My condolences go out to those affected by this atrocity. Their lives will never be the same, especially the victims classmates and teachers- who are also victims in this. But I think we should also recognize the first responders who had to deal with what I can only imagine to be a crime scene no one should ever have to see.
> 
> I’ve worked with a Sandy Hook first responder (they were a patient at the psych hospital I work at) and I can’t even begin to describe the trauma they have been through. Just hearing about the aftermath they experienced was traumatic for me and the other providers on the treatment team. First responders see awful things routinely, but I don’t think anything can prepare a person for a classroom full of massacred children. What they dealt with is an unimaginably horrific thing to have to live with. And I have the deepest empathy and respect for anyone who has had to see this type of thing. It is not something anyone should ever have to witness.



None of us individually can solve this. What we can do cumulatively is never ever vote for a person who supports the NRA. As long as people keep voting for them, these NRA-sponsored politicians will keep allowing our children to be murdered.

When Congress refused to act in 2012, they GUARANTEED that Sandy Hook would NOT be once-in-a-lifetime.

Empathy and respect are honorable things to offer: do you think a single person whose lives were touched by such a tragedy wants looser gun laws? If we truly empathize with them and respect them, we should make it as difficult as possible for people to get guns, and we should ban assault weapons completely.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

SuperMatt said:


> None of us individually can solve this. What we can do cumulatively is never ever vote for a person who supports the NRA. As long as people keep voting for them, these NRA-sponsored politicians will keep allowing our children to be murdered.
> 
> When Congress refused to act in 2012, they GUARANTEED that Sandy Hook would NOT be once-in-a-lifetime.
> 
> Empathy and respect are honorable things to offer: do you think a single person whose lives were touched by such a tragedy wants looser gun laws? If we truly empathize with them and respect them, we should make it as difficult as possible for people to get guns, and we should ban assault weapons completely.




Not a NRA member or a gun owner, but the more I’ve heard more and more gun owners aren’t happy with the NRA and it’s minority rule within minority rule in that it’s the NRA leadership that wants to stonewall any and all gun legislation and a lot of their (shrinking) members dont agree with them.  But it seems politicians only make time to hang out with extremists on freedom over safety and top wealth over the general population.


----------



## Citysnaps

Today marks the one year anniversary when 10 employees at the Santa Clara Valley Transit Authority rail yard in San Jose, California were killed by an armed co-worker.









						Memorial, ceremonies to mark one year since VTA mass shooting
					

Today marks one year since the mass shooting at the Santa Clara VTA Guadalupe light rail yard that claimed 10 lives: Nine employees were killed by a co-worker and one person who witnessed the shooting died by suicide weeks later.




					www.ktvu.com


----------



## DT

Distressing videos show parents begging cops to stop Texas school shooting
					

The livestreamed footage captured the unbearable anguish as parents rushed to Robb Elementary School in Uvalde where deranged gunman Salvador Ramos, 18, was inside for up to an hour




					nypost.com


----------



## GermanSuplex

Abbott doesn't care. I'm sure he does from a superficial "Gee, that's too bad" standpoint, but he'll be undeterred politically. Attending a fundraiser the same day? Bringing up Chicago, which is just an eyeroll-inducing retort from conservatives about gun violence.

Conservatives know this will only be in the news until the next terrible thing happens. The public Jan. 6 committee hearings are June 9, which will suck a lot of wind out of the story. That is, if we don't have another mass shooting first.


----------



## fooferdoggie

GermanSuplex said:


> Abbott doesn't care. I'm sure he does from a superficial "Gee, that's too bad" standpoint, but he'll be undeterred politically. Attending a fundraiser the same day? Bringing up Chicago, which is just an eyeroll-inducing retort from conservatives about gun violence.
> 
> Conservatives know this will only be in the news until the next terrible thing happens. The public Jan. 6 committee hearings are June 9, which will suck a lot of wind out of the story. That is, if we don't have another mass shooting first.



why would he care its brown kids that died.


----------



## Eric

Never mind the ridiculous notion that teachers should be armed and at the ready for active shooters, even the cops can't handle it.


They’d be less cowardly at least from
      BlackPeopleTwitter


----------



## fooferdoggie

there was a armed guard too still didn't to prevent it.


----------



## GermanSuplex

Um... no, the time to ask "Where is God?" is when the Texas Governor is cracking jokes on Twitter about Texas being second in the nation for gun sales, and wanting to displace California in having the most.









						Texas school shooting begs the question: Where is God?
					

After the school shooting in Uvalde, Texas, we need the raw presence of God, and His presence will be present through your prayers.




					www.foxnews.com


----------



## JayMysteri0

It maybe very slow, but I do believe the rest of the country is hitting a breaking point.  The problem of course will be what happens when someone does hit that breaking point.  I think the NRA has been fully aware of that possibility which is why they bizarrely ban guns at their events, but push for guns everywhere else.  It's why law makers freaked out so much when Beto had the nerve to step up & confront them, when they did ritual of pretending to be powerless, after doing their best after the last shooting to make this happen.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1529546836641447937/
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1529681862112714755/
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1529675142997188610/
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1529641078583853056/

I just fear it's going to become more & more soul crushing until someone does break bad.  We've seen from the last 2 shootings within 10 days of each other that the "good gun with a gun" line just bullshit.  It only got the good guy killed, and we don't know what happened with the resource officer that shooter managed to lose.

There's also of course the trauma that is building for a thing no one rightfully could anticipate.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1529466518878031872/
 

I still can't wrap my head around the concept that guns have become the leading cause of death of kids.  In America.  That says way too much.


----------



## JayMysteri0

Eric said:


> Never mind the ridiculous notion that teachers should be armed and at the ready for active shooters, even the cops can't handle it.
> 
> 
> They’d be less cowardly at least from
> BlackPeopleTwitter



My "favorite" thing?

We are talking about these teachers.



> South Dakota teachers scramble for dollar bills in ‘demeaning’ game
> 
> 
> Company behind the competition apologises after footage showing teachers stuffing notes into clothing to fund classrooms goes viral
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theguardian.com





> New report shows the key driver for teachers ready to call it quits: making less money than they did in 2010
> 
> 
> A Union of Professionals
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.texasaft.org




They don't get paid enough as is, and aren't given enough resources for their classes.  Now these entitled assholes who value a firearm over a child's life, want those same teachers to be armed?  They already risk their lives.  One of the teachers that died, supposedly died trying to cover a child.

Teachers don't sign up to be armed personnel.  Where the hell are they going to find more time to be annually trained, so they are always prepared?

If these assholes aren't always blaming someone or something else for a mess they help create & make worse, they're turning around to always ask the wrong people to step up and do what they won't.

Ugh.
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1529247522547548161/


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

citypix said:


> Today marks the one year anniversary when 10 employees at the Santa Clara Valley Transit Authority rail yard in San Jose, California were killed by an armed co-worker.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Memorial, ceremonies to mark one year since VTA mass shooting
> 
> 
> Today marks one year since the mass shooting at the Santa Clara VTA Guadalupe light rail yard that claimed 10 lives: Nine employees were killed by a co-worker and one person who witnessed the shooting died by suicide weeks later.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.ktvu.com




I put in the thread when that happened that I drive right by that transit station every day on my work commute, missed the shooting by about a half-hour.  It's pretty surreal.  It's getting to the point in the US that it feels like you can't consider yourself a legit American city until a mass shooting puts you on the map.  At minimum I don't think anybody is going "that could never happen here".


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

GermanSuplex said:


> Um... no, the time to ask "Where is God?" is when the Texas Governor is cracking jokes on Twitter about Texas being second in the nation for gun sales, and wanting to displace California in having the most.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Texas school shooting begs the question: Where is God?
> 
> 
> After the school shooting in Uvalde, Texas, we need the raw presence of God, and His presence will be present through your prayers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.foxnews.com




Also wrap your head around more gun sales happening in California, probably the perceived "They're coming for your guns!" capital of the country.


----------



## SuperMatt

The right-wing Texans say the problem is mental health. Governor Abbott tried this trope himself. If that IS true, then that’s even MORE proof he doesn’t care about kids. Texas is LAST in America in access to mental health care.



			https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2022/may/25/beto-orourke/recent-report-put-texas-last-among-states-and-dc-m/


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1529830077718044672/

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1529857701546643457/

Accountability is a thing for others.


----------



## Runs For Fun

Over the 24 hours since the Uvalde massacre, Fox News has proposed at least 50 "solutions" and none of them are gun control. from
      Damnthatsinteresting


----------



## AG_PhamD

SuperMatt said:


> None of us individually can solve this. What we can do cumulatively is never ever vote for a person who supports the NRA. As long as people keep voting for them, these NRA-sponsored politicians will keep allowing our children to be murdered.
> 
> When Congress refused to act in 2012, they GUARANTEED that Sandy Hook would NOT be once-in-a-lifetime.
> 
> Empathy and respect are honorable things to offer: do you think a single person whose lives were touched by such a tragedy wants looser gun laws? If we truly empathize with them and respect them, we should make it as difficult as possible for people to get guns, and we should ban assault weapons completely.




I can’t speak to what victims and those affected by these events want. I would imagine most people want a higher level of gun control as that’s what most Americans (including NRA members) want. But you still have a population who think more guns is the answer to gun violence. 

If we are to believe the surveys about peoples opinion on greater gun control laws, the NRA and many of the right wing politicians stance on this does not align with the majority of their constituents. 

The motivation for change first and foremost should be the mass killing of innocent people and it’s all the worse when children are the target.

Out of respect for the victims and all the others affected, I think the appropriate tact is one that’s realistic. And it’s not realistic at this point in time to ban all guns is remotely feasible and as unnecessary as I think assault riffles are, that would still very much be a reach. If the argument is to make guns as “difficult as possible” to acquire will  only stagnate any chance of change. We can’t have this devolve to an for/against absolutist debate. 

In my opinion, the fact should be “as difficult as possible for those who should never have their hands on a gun”. So many pro-gun politicians say they want this, so it’s easier to hold their feet to the fire with it. 

At the very least if assault riffles (or let’s say ALL semi-automatic weapons) should be held to the same standard as pistols are in most states. Minimum age 21 (unless military or police). Required training through a licensed instructor. Required interview with local police. Police must interview friends and neighbors of applicant. Had even one of these been mandatory for the perpetrator this whole scenario very likely could have been avoided. And as these laws exist in most states, applying them to all semi-auto weapons should not be much of a stretch. 

The claim by some politicians nothing can be done is absolutely ridiculous- or that that the only answer is to “fortify” schools is the only answer. Schools should obviously have a reasonable degree of building security- but it’s a school, there’s no reason it should need to be designed like embassy. Nor should there have to be a swat team member on site full time. The fact that even suggestions are made indicates there is a serious problem. 

That said, I’m not convinced the majority of our partisan leadership in particular can even have a mature conversation about this topic. These tragedies are too exploited for political reasons than actually catalyzing meaningful change.


----------



## GermanSuplex

JayMysteri0 said:


> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1529830077718044672/
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1529857701546643457/
> 
> Accountability is a thing for others.




Watching Ted Cruz - who is supposed to be answering questions on what he’s doing and how he’s going to address this (it’s his state, after all ) - and all he can do is offer two generic talking points and then runs away. “You’re politicizing it” and “Democrat laws wouldn’t have stopped this”. Ok, then what will?









						Ted Cruz Storms Out on British Interviewer When Asked Why School Shootings Only Happen in America
					

The pro-gun Texas senator got testy with Sky News journalist and insisted the U.S. is the “safest country on earth” at vigil for 21 dead before heading for the exit.



					www.thedailybeast.com
				




Now would be a good time for democrats to say that if we’re going to dismantle a woman’s autonomy over her own body, then guns should be fair game too.


----------



## The-Real-Deal82

Ted Cruz is being used to demonstrate how weak gun supporting American politicians are today. He couldn’t answer questions from Sky News and did the two standard deflections. The first was to accuse the person questioning as having a different political agenda and second was to make the claim America is the best country in the world. Embarrassing.


----------



## DT

JayMysteri0 said:


> There's also of course the trauma that is building for a thing no one rightfully could anticipate.






JayMysteri0 said:


> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1529466518878031872/




And exactly WTF do these idiots think they're doing?  Walking around with a gun strapped to their back? That's not any kind of tactical preparedness, that's to make a statement, that's for some kind of attempt to intimidate other people.  Seriously, anyone with a touch of training would take the firearm away from the idiot in the blue shirt and beat the idiot with the green shirt unconsciousness in about 30 seconds. These two halfwits are about as prepared for any real emergency as most of the out shape, mouth breathing fuckwits pretending to be soldiers on the weekend.

It's all so stupid, the only thing any of these people are doing is causing unrest, trauma for people, they're not doing anything to stop violence, they're causing it to fester, and let me guess, if a person of color did something they disagreed with, then that firearm wouldn't be part of the reaction?  Fuck these people and Target too, if they allow that.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Runs For Fun said:


> Over the 24 hours since the Uvalde massacre, Fox News has proposed at least 50 "solutions" and none of them are gun control. from
> Damnthatsinteresting





How about we combine the school system with the prison system and only allow white kids to graduate. There, I solved it.


----------



## Eric

FTW...


These colors don't run* from
      PoliticalHumor


----------



## JayMysteri0

Eric said:


> FTW...
> 
> 
> These colors don't run* from
> PoliticalHumor



As I said in the Texas thread, now the attention is being directed towards the police.  One good guy with a gun is supposed to stop a bad guy with a gun.  An entire group of trained good guys with guns were outside with parents.  With tasers and restraints.

It was NOT a good look.


----------



## DT

JFC, the 80 year old Ukrainians fighting for their children and grandchildren's freedom would've handled this 1000 time better.


----------



## Eric

DT said:


> JFC, the 80 year old Ukrainians fighting for their children and grandchildren's freedom would've handled this 1000 time better.



Finally actually saw the report on ABC News and I don't care what side of the aisle one is on, the fact that armed officers waited outside of that school for nearly an hour while knowing there was an active shooter in there is outrageous. They showed them standing out there, many in vests, just keeping people out as they waited for the border patrol, unbelievable. Every last one of them should be charged.


----------



## SuperMatt

Eric said:


> Finally actually saw the report on ABC News and I don't care what side of the aisle one is on, the fact that armed officers waited outside of that school for nearly an hour while knowing there was an active shooter in there is outrageous. They showed them standing out there, many in vests, just keeping people out as they waited for the border patrol, unbelievable. Every last one of them should be charged.



https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1530012847694131200/

Good guys with guns? Not any in this tragedy.


----------



## Joe

Those cops were trash. Sitting outside doing nothing for 40 minutes.  Smdh


----------



## AG_PhamD

Eric said:


> Finally actually saw the report on ABC News and I don't care what side of the aisle one is on, the fact that armed officers waited outside of that school for nearly an hour while knowing there was an active shooter in there is outrageous. They showed them standing out there, many in vests, just keeping people out as they waited for the border patrol, unbelievable. Every last one of them should be charged.




Yes, totally unacceptable. I thought this whole procedure was worked out after Columbine… and Parkland… and probably others- you don’t wait for backup, period. If you’re not prepared to go into a building with a gunman killing children, being a police officer isn’t for you. I don’t wish that experience on any police officer, but it’s the reality we live in and police should must be prepared. I don’t know how you can live with the knowledge you _didn’t_ do everything you could. Even the police that indeed do the right thing in deadly situations often beat themselves up for not being able to save everyone.

You also have to wonder not only how many victims could have have been spared from being shot, but how many shot victims would have survived had medical care been rendered sooner. I’m sure everyone has heard of the “golden hour” in relation to trauma care. Quite a number of patients were transferred at least as far as San Antonio for care at Level 1 trauma centers and even a military hospital- about 85mi/1.5hrs away by road. I assume TX has a higher than average number of EMS helicopters but that’s irrelevant when victims are bleeding out for an hour.

I still am not sure it’s entirely clear what happened with the police response. But it doesn’t look good given the lack of clarity and apparent obfuscation of facts.

I saw a clip from Fox News today where Greg Gutfeld, one of the worst personalities on TV, actually flirted with the idea of raising the age to purchase all guns to 21. Quite a fascinating opinion coming from Fox News. Maybe there is a silver of hope for some sensible reform.


----------



## Herdfan

Just to clarify, my  are for what you posted, not for the poster.  

When the cops are restraining unarmed parents who are wanting to rush into the schools, there is a problem.  Those officers need to be fired.

Maybe TV has given us an unrealistic idea of cops running towards shooters, but we count on the police to protect us and they failed.


----------



## GermanSuplex

Herdfan said:


> Maybe TV has given us an unrealistic idea of cops running towards shooters, but we count on the police to protect us and they failed.




Agreed. But I would also add that this also looks worse for two reasons:

-One, the officials either lied or were grossly misinformed when they said the gunman was confronted by a resource officer. He wasn’t. He hung out at the school, fired at people across the street, walked around a bit, then entered unobstructed.

-The rhetoric of “only a good guy with a gun can stop a bad guy with a gun”. Well, there were good guys with guns at Parkland. Didn’t help. The cops in Uvalde said they couldn’t enter the building because they were being fired at. That’s a tacit admission that could guys with guns can’t always stop a bad guy with a gun - especially an assault-style weapon.

Our lax gun laws, social media and tense political climate have merged to create a really scary and ugly pandemic. The more it happens, the more widespread I fear it will become.


----------



## Herdfan

GermanSuplex said:


> -One, the officials either lied or were grossly misinformed when they said the gunman was confronted by a resource officer. He wasn’t. He hung out at the school, fired at people across the street, walked around a bit, *then entered unobstructed.*




This right here.  How did this happen?  

Supposedly he entered through an unlocked door in the rear of the building.  The school officials are going to have to answer some serious questions.

For anyone who has had kids in school in the past 10 years, how hard was it to get into their school?  We had to be buzzed in to the office, then after producing ID and a valid reason to be there, you then get buzzed into the school.


----------



## GermanSuplex

Herdfan said:


> This right here.  How did this happen?
> 
> Supposedly he entered through an unlocked door in the rear of the building.  The school officials are going to have to answer some serious questions.
> 
> For anyone who has had kids in school in the past 10 years, how hard was it to get into their school?  We had to be buzzed in to the office, then after producing ID and a valid reason to be there, you then get buzzed into the school.




There’s video of him entering the building.






Even after Columbine, that was not possible in schools in my public school district. In 1997, you could go off campus for lunch, come to school early or stay late and walk the halls. By 2000, we had student ID and two points of entry with unarmed guards or off-official duty police who freelanced at the school. If you came early or stayed late, you did so in the commons area. So the fact he could just walk into an unlocked door - after having just crashed a vehicle and roaming around the school first - is pretty crazy. Especially since I read that Uvalde school district had done a LOT of things right leading up to this. If you read what they had in place, this seemed like a top-notch school district. They have their own police force, they had training for these events, all sorts of staff and technology.. it’s wild. And yet, here we are.

Perhaps, just maybe, it IS the guns that are part of the problem. More than one thing can be true at once. Gun defenders point to other issues… maybe it’s all true. But continuing to pretend it’s NOT the guns is sort of naive. Like an alcoholic who tries everything to get their life on track - except giving up alcohol - then wondering why things keep getting worse.


----------



## Citysnaps

People who own assault weapons and _continue_ to vote for GOP politicians who take money from the NRA, do so knowing nothing will change, and there will be no gun control legislation. As a result, based on history, future school and other gun massacres with more deaths are pretty much guaranteed. 

Those voters and politicians have reduced massacred children to being mere adverse consequences of preserving their constitutional right to own assault weapons. That their constitutional right is often expressed with smugness with little  reflection or thought about those suffering the consequences feels very sociopathic.


----------



## Herdfan

citypix said:


> People who own assault weapons and _continue_ to vote for GOP politicians who take money from the NRA, do so knowing nothing will change, and there will be no gun control legislation. As a result, based on history, future school and other gun massacres with more deaths are pretty much guaranteed.
> 
> Those voters and politicians have reduced massacred children to being mere adverse consequences of preserving their constitutional right to own assault weapons. That their constitutional right is often expressed with smugness with little  reflection or thought about those suffering the consequences feels very sociopathic.




I think you are putting too much on the GOP.  There are plenty of Dems who would not vote for gun restrictions.  I mean the Dems had control of Congress AND 60 votes in the Senate AND Obama.  Why didn't they pass gun control then?  They passed the ACA which cost many members their seats.  So why not pass gun control?


----------



## SuperMatt

GermanSuplex said:


> There’s video of him entering the building.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Even after Columbine, that was not possible in schools in my public school district. In 1997, you could go off campus for lunch, come to school early or stay late and walk the halls. By 2000, we had student ID and two points of entry with unarmed guards or off-official duty police who freelanced at the school. If you came early or stayed late, you did so in the commons area. So the fact he could just walk into an unlocked door - after having just crashed a vehicle and roaming around the school first - is pretty crazy. Especially since I read that Uvalde school district had done a LOT of things right leading up to this. If you read what they had in place, this seemed like a top-notch school district. They have their own police force, they had training for these events, all sorts of staff and technology.. it’s wild. And yet, here we are.
> 
> Perhaps, just maybe, it IS the guns that are part of the problem. More than one thing can be true at once. Gun defenders point to other issues… maybe it’s all true. But continuing to pretend it’s NOT the guns is sort of naive. Like an alcoholic who tries everything to get their life on track - except giving up alcohol - then wondering why things keep getting worse.



It’s sad that we have to ask “how did a person get into the school”? Because in 2022, we have to make sure to protect schools in America as if they were in the middle of war zones. 

Too many people love guns more than children. I am appalled that people are still going to the NRA convention. Everybody should boycott it, but I guess there are plenty who probably see this as an opportunity to increase sales, due to the fear.

Fuck the gun nuts. Put in the most restrictive gun laws possible under the constitution. The school resource officers, “mental health” promises, etc, etc... haven’t done ANYTHING. It has only gotten worse and worse.

Doing the same thing repeatedly and expecting a different result is the definition of insanity. Time to do something different; restrict guns as much as possible!


----------



## AG_PhamD

Looks like the Texas DPH is admitting the local police failed to breach the classroom and take down the shooter because the on-scene commander assumed everyone was dead despite 911 receiving phone calls people are still alive. 

The first tragedy is that the clearly disturbed perpetrator was able to buy a gun, the second was shooting, the police not properly responding is the third. Let’s not have the fourth tragedy be that no changes to gun laws come out of this.


----------



## fooferdoggie

he assumed everyone is dead so no rush???


----------



## Eric

These flag memes are valid and applicable here, they chose to take a flag meant for ALL Americans and make it their own right wing calling.


__
		https://www.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/uz1u5c


----------



## Yoused

AG_PhamD said:


> The first tragedy is that the clearly disturbed perpetrator was able to buy a gun …




That much is patently absurd in the context of American Freedom. There were basically no significant red flag indicators that our system could have captured. He was not obviously deranged or disturbed in any meaningful, detectable way. You simply cannot have widely available semiautomatic weapons without having incidents of this type. Pick one. Or pick the other. There is *no middle ground*.


----------



## Roller

Yoused said:


> That much is patently absurd in the context of American Freedom. There were basically no significant red flag indicators that our system could have captured. He was not obviously deranged or disturbed in any meaningful, detectable way. You simply cannot have widely available semiautomatic weapons without having incidents of this type. Pick one. Or pick the other. There is *no middle ground*.



Agreed. *Nobody* should be able to purchase this type of firearm, and strict controls need to be in place for all other types.


----------



## Eric

Here are the cops taking down parents who are just trying to get to their children as they continued to get shot in that school. Every one of these worthless motherfuckers needs to be charged and sent to prison.


----------



## AG_PhamD

Yoused said:


> That much is patently absurd in the context of American Freedom. There were basically no significant red flag indicators that our system could have captured. He was not obviously deranged or disturbed in any meaningful, detectable way. You simply cannot have widely available semiautomatic weapons without having incidents of this type. Pick one. Or pick the other. There is *no middle ground*.




I disagree. You are correct that there’s not automated way of doing this in this individual case- i.e. background checks. But rifles were treated like pistol permits in most places, there would be a required interview with police as well as the requirement to provide references- in MA that number is 4. I know in CT they will interview non-references, such as neighbors, family members, co-workers.

You’d also need to go through a certified instruction course (12hrs?). I don’t know what liability instructors have if any, but they should be required to be a judge of not only firearms competency, but also character (and be required to disclose any concerns to police who should also be required to interview the instructors as references).

Reportedly everyone knew this guy was disturbed. People were aware of his proclivity for self-harm, which any reasonable person would immediately conclude means he is unfit for gun ownership. He reportedly would bring boxing gloves to the park and attempt to instigate fights with people. His coworkers were afraid of him. The police apparently responded to his home a number of times for domestic disputes. His mom allegedly wanted to kick him out of the house- why?

Perhaps if people in his social sphere were asked about his character and stability as a requirement to gun ownership, things would have turned out differently. Certainly this would not prevent all incidents, ie the Buffalo shooter was reportedly seen as “a nice kid”, but it would be applicable in most other cases- Columbine, Parkland, Sandyhook, etc.

The majority of mass school shootings  are committed by people under the age of 21. The majority of guns are purchased legally. A lot of psych disorders do not become apparent until the late teens/early 20’s. Criminal behavior doesn’t aways become evident until that time as well and juvenile records are often expunged or not considered in the background checks. It only seems logical that the minimum age to own or buy a gun should at least be 21.

And I would personally push for 24 based on the data of whose committing crimes.

This absolute, all or nothing, defeatist attitude on both sides is ridiculous and only stagnates change.


----------



## SuperMatt

Yoused said:


> That much is patently absurd in the context of American Freedom. There were basically no significant red flag indicators that our system could have captured. He was not obviously deranged or disturbed in any meaningful, detectable way. You simply cannot have widely available semiautomatic weapons without haring incidents of this type. Pick one. Or pick the other. There is *no middle ground*.



We won’t even get a national requirement for background checks. The NRA isn’t even embarrassed enough to cancel their convention in Texas in the light of this shooting. Why? Because they know they have over 40 senators bought and paid for. Until that changes, innocent kids will keep getting gunned down. 

I believe in my heart all the senators that refuse to act because they want to stay in power will spend eternity in hell. God only forgives the repentant.


----------



## Herdfan

Yoused said:


> That much is patently absurd in the context of American Freedom. *There were basically no significant red flag indicators that our system could have captured. *




It seems there may have been, but the NIS database did not have access to it because it occurred when he was a minor.

Does this need to change?  Should minors continue to be protected once they turn 18?  I say no.  Maybe seal the records WHILE they are a minor, but then unseal them at age 18.


----------



## AG_PhamD

Herdfan said:


> It seems there may have been, but the NIS database did not have access to it because it occurred when he was a minor.
> 
> Does this need to change?  Should minors continue to be protected once they turn 18?  I say no.  Maybe seal the records WHILE they are a minor, but then unseal them at age 18.




How about sealed for employment purposes, sealed for adult prosecution purposes- unless it’s relevant (ie crime occuring shortly into adulthood or it demonstrates a lifelong pattern of criminal behavior) and perhaps depending on the circumstances of the crime. And something similar for guns. 

There tends to be two major scenarios that should be delineated. Minors who commit crimes and grow up to live a life full of criminality. And then minors who make stupid, immature decisions and grow up to be responsible, law abiding citizens. 

If you’re arrested at 16 for a significant crime and try to get a gun at 19- maybe not the best idea. Now take that same person at age 35 with zero criminal history in the intervening years, they are a productive member of society, and everything else checks out, then it’s probably a safe to assume they are not a high risk.  

I’m sure the data could be acquired and analyzed to create evidence-based guidelines on whose juvenile record predicts a high risk gun ownership scenario and whose dose not.


----------



## Eric

Speaks volumes.


__
		https://www.reddit.com/r/WhitePeopleTwitter/comments/uz8935


----------



## SuperMatt

AG_PhamD said:


> How about sealed for employment purposes, sealed for adult prosecution purposes- unless it’s relevant (ie crime occuring shortly into adulthood or it demonstrates a lifelong pattern of criminal behavior) and perhaps depending on the circumstances of the crime. And something similar for guns.
> 
> There tends to be two major scenarios that should be delineated. Minors who commit crimes and grow up to live a life full of criminality. And then minors who make stupid, immature decisions and grow up to be responsible, law abiding citizens.
> 
> If you’re arrested at 16 for a significant crime and try to get a gun at 19- maybe not the best idea. Now take that same person at age 35 with zero criminal history in the intervening years, they are a productive member of society, and everything else checks out, then it’s probably a safe to assume they are not a high risk.
> 
> I’m sure the data could be acquired and analyzed to create evidence-based guidelines on whose juvenile record predicts a high risk gun ownership scenario and whose dose not.



So let’s have an advanced system of spying on American citizens and break the long standing protections for juvenile offenders? Instead of banning semi-automatic weapons? Because gun rights trump human rights. 

Real solutions are simple. They sadly won’t be passed by NRA-funded politicians. Pretending we can predict future crimes “minority report” style is absurd. 

The problem is too many guns, especially semi-automatics. *Regulate* them *well* instead of violating citizen privacy.


----------



## Yoused

AG_PhamD said:


> I’m sure the data could be acquired and analyzed to create evidence-based guidelines on whose juvenile record predicts a high risk gun ownership scenario and whose dose not.




What happens after these incidents is "guns are a big problem", which ends up being counterproductive because, in part, there is almost nothing we can do to get that aspect under control. All it takes is just enough opposition to reeling in that part of the problem to prevent any kind of meaningful progress.

But, ultimately, the guns themselves are merely a major effect of much larger cultural defects that will not be fixed by addressing the gun problem. We look at what happened but barely scratch the surface of the why of it, the much broader underlying factors that give rise to these incidents. Because, once we start to go under the superficial crust, the effective remedies become much more difficult to get to and shake our faith in the stability ofour society. And no one wants to look at things that make them uncomfortable.


----------



## Spike

Yoused said:


> the guns themselves are merely a major effect of much larger cultural defects that will not be fixed by addressing the gun problem



It's not just cultural defects. It's political defects. The much heralded (at least by politicans and 2A supporters) US Constitution is built around protection of slave states. It's difficult to change. Some historians believe the 2A was put in to allow slaveholders to put down slave rebellions. Changes are extremely difficult. The problem with Congress goes way beyond the current makeup and the purchase of politicians by corporations, it's the structure from the Constitution. There is no solution without drastic change.


----------



## AG_PhamD

SuperMatt said:


> So let’s have an advanced system of spying on American citizens and break the long standing protections for juvenile offenders? Instead of banning semi-automatic weapons? Because gun rights trump human rights.
> 
> Real solutions are simple. They sadly won’t be passed by NRA-funded politicians. Pretending we can predict future crimes “minority report” style is absurd.
> 
> The problem is too many guns, especially semi-automatics. *Regulate* them *well* instead of violating citizen privacy.




This is one of those situations where you’re talking last me rather than at me… This isn’t the position I would have expected from you. I’m not surprised at totally twisting what I said into a pretzel, but I am surprised you would be against more restriction.  

The government is spying on who? Themselves? They’re the ones already holding the records. Protecting citizens from what? Buying guns they shouldn’t have? 

[Again, to be clear, my suggestion is only applies to guns, not employment or necessarily future prosecutions (BTW juvenile records can be unsealed for reasons including future prosecutions and jobs that require an FBI background check ie police officers, military, etc and of course the Patriot Act- there’s some legit spying for you)]

My primary suggestion essentially already exists in some states come to find out. In California people who commit certain juvenile offenses are barred from gun ownership until the age of 30. Apparently some states have laws barring offenders who committed crimes that would be considered a felony as an adult. Are these states spying- particularly when such restrictions are being applied proactively, when the person is convicted.

Regardless, such background check systems don’t have to divulge details of the records, only whether the applicant is eligible or not. 

Also worth noting not all states automatically seal juvenile records at age 18 or will not seal all of them. 

And no, I did not propose a “minority report system”. My point about using data to create “guidelines” means using statistics to determine what crimes or patterns of crimes lead to high risk and what amount of time or age is best to allow consideration for gun ownership to minimize risk that the gun would be used in a crime. Such guidelines would be used to _inform policy_. Not to create some algorithm that creates a individualized decision for each applicant. I didn’t realize using risk assessment to optimize and justify laws was such a radical and controversial idea. 

When it comes to purchasing a gun why is it that _all_ juvenile records should be more protected than mental health records (which are only disclosed to the NICS system in _extremely_ limited cases). 

So you want to make buying guns “as difficult as possible” but don’t think relevant juvenile records (at the least violence, threats, gun possession, gang involvement) should be relevant in the background process? So presumably a kid with a concerning record, turns 18 2-3 years later, record is wiped, and now he can buy a gun. That makes no sense to me.


----------



## Herdfan

Spike said:


> It's not just cultural defects. It's political defects. The much heralded (at least by politicans and 2A supporters) US Constitution is built around protection of slave states. It's difficult to change. Some historians believe the 2A was put in to allow slaveholders to put down slave rebellions. Changes are extremely difficult. The problem with Congress goes way beyond the current makeup and the purchase of politicians by corporations, it's the structure from the Constitution. There is no solution without drastic change.




Nope.  It was to allow citizens to rise up against a tyrannical government.  Remember, most of these colonists fled an oppressive King in England and were leery of government.  Remember Paul Revere?  He was riding to alert the citizens that the Redcoats were coming and the reason they were coming was to take the citizen's guns.


----------



## The-Real-Deal82

I think Americans on the whole as a nation are just generally more aggressive than other countries. Your country goes to war a lot and this is promoted for votes with people buying into the aggression of winning and being told how great they are. Your school system is built on competition and being the best and popular. Kids are under pressure worldwide in terms of exams but the US seems to have the added pressure within its system where kids compete to be the best at sports and popular. Prescription drugs are advertised on TV, something I found shocking, and kids are prescribed anti-depressants like no other country in the developed world.

Reading the comments sections on just about any news article and the most extreme views seem to be American and usually violent. Racism is rife throughout the United States and people who are different, gay, trans, atheists are condemned to a very high level. Religion dictates laws and there is a drive to take away rights that have stood for 50+ years in recent months. 

Then you have guns. I don’t believe America has a worse problem with mental healthcare than other countries because every country complains of lacking funds and systems to deal with this. Don’t believe your politicians when they point to other countries and suggest ‘well they’ve got a knife problem so if we didn’t have guns it would be knives instead’. America has a higher knife crime rate than any of these developed countries too! There’s a big cultural issue to tackle and as an outsider, I have no clue what you are doing to do.


----------



## The-Real-Deal82

Herdfan said:


> Nope. It was to allow citizens to rise up against a tyrannical government. Remember, most of these colonists fled an oppressive King in England and were leery of government. Remember Paul Revere? He was riding to alert the citizens that the Redcoats were coming and the reason they were coming was to take the citizen's guns.




Britain used to have the constant threat of Royalists and parliamentarians coming to oppress its population but none of this has happened for centuries. We have evolved as a nation and have a strong democracy. Don’t fall for the ridiculous redneck agenda that you need firearms to fight the US army someday as it sounds rather far fetched. Land of the free but constantly worried about loss of power will just keep you imprisoned and paranoid beyond reach.


----------



## fooferdoggie

this is America.
Stocks in US gun makers rise following horror Texas school shooting​








						Stocks in US gun makers rise following horror Texas school shooting
					






					www.9news.com.au


----------



## fooferdoggie

Lets Hope they are sued into oblivion.​Maker of rifle used by Texas school gunman posted ad featuring kid days before slaughter​








						Maker of rifle used by Texas school gunman posted ad featuring kid days before slaughter
					

In the attached photo, a boy wearing a T-shirt that reads #Rascal is seen sitting cross-legged looking down at the scoped firearm with a full magazine lying in front of him. An adult’s finger is po…




					nypost.com


----------



## SuperMatt

Herdfan said:


> Nope. It was to allow citizens to rise up against a tyrannical government. Remember, most of these colonists fled an oppressive King in England and were leery of government. Remember Paul Revere? He was riding to alert the citizens that the Redcoats were coming and the reason they were coming was to take the citizen's guns.



That’s not the stated purpose of the amendment… written into the amendment itself. The stated purpose is for the “security of the state,” not for armed rebellion. If you look beyond just the text and at a bit of history, the idea of the 2nd amendment was to give states the ability to defend themselves, as they questioned the ability of the federal government to protect them well enough by itself.

It was never meant as a way for a group of citizens to rise up against the American government. Such a belief is dangerous and contrary to history. In my opinion, that mentality, pushed by gun lovers for decades, directly led to a mob of people thinking it was their right and duty to storm the Capitol, which was, in their eyes, representative of a ”tyrannical government” because they voted for the minority candidate in the most recent election.

Republicans calling Biden a tyrant + NRA messaging that the 2nd amendment is meant for them to overturn a tyrannical government? Sounds like a recipe for armed rebellion. This nonsense, not based in history, needs to stop.

And don’t forget, until 2008, court precedent made the 2nd amendment officially a collective right, not an individual one. And that 2008 decision was the narrowest possible (5-4) SCOTUS vote.


----------



## JayMysteri0

fooferdoggie said:


> Lets Hope they are sued into oblivion.​Maker of rifle used by Texas school gunman posted ad featuring kid days before slaughter​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maker of rifle used by Texas school gunman posted ad featuring kid days before slaughter
> 
> 
> In the attached photo, a boy wearing a T-shirt that reads #Rascal is seen sitting cross-legged looking down at the scoped firearm with a full magazine lying in front of him. An adult’s finger is po…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 14421



_But it's for sport, it's for hunting, it's for...    _

We know what it's for.

 Part of what helped the Sandy Hook families win their suit, was based on Remington's marketing.  Sue them into the pavement.


----------



## SuperMatt

AG_PhamD said:


> This is one of those situations where you’re talking last me rather than at me… This isn’t the position I would have expected from you. I’m not surprised at totally twisting what I said into a pretzel, but I am surprised you would be against more restriction.
> 
> The government is spying on who? Themselves? They’re the ones already holding the records. Protecting citizens from what? Buying guns they shouldn’t have?
> 
> [Again, to be clear, my suggestion is only applies to guns, not employment or necessarily future prosecutions (BTW juvenile records can be unsealed for reasons including future prosecutions and jobs that require an FBI background check ie police officers, military, etc and of course the Patriot Act- there’s some legit spying for you)]
> 
> My primary suggestion essentially already exists in some states come to find out. In California people who commit certain juvenile offenses are barred from gun ownership until the age of 30. Apparently some states have laws barring offenders who committed crimes that would be considered a felony as an adult. Are these states spying- particularly when such restrictions are being applied proactively, when the person is convicted.
> 
> Regardless, such background check systems don’t have to divulge details of the records, only whether the applicant is eligible or not.
> 
> Also worth noting not all states automatically seal juvenile records at age 18 or will not seal all of them.
> 
> And no, I did not propose a “minority report system”. My point about using data to create “guidelines” means using statistics to determine what crimes or patterns of crimes lead to high risk and what amount of time or age is best to allow consideration for gun ownership to minimize risk that the gun would be used in a crime. Such guidelines would be used to _inform policy_. Not to create some algorithm that creates a individualized decision for each applicant. I didn’t realize using risk assessment to optimize and justify laws was such a radical and controversial idea.
> 
> When it comes to purchasing a gun why is it that _all_ juvenile records should be more protected than mental health records (which are only disclosed to the NICS system in _extremely_ limited cases).
> 
> So you want to make buying guns “as difficult as possible” but don’t think relevant juvenile records (at the least violence, threats, gun possession, gang involvement) should be relevant in the background process? So presumably a kid with a concerning record, turns 18 2-3 years later, record is wiped, and now he can buy a gun. That makes no sense to me.



How many of the mass shooters had a juvenile criminal record?

What is the racial demographic of those with juvenile criminal records? How many majority-black schools have police officers in the school vs how many majority-white schools have police in there?

Due to extreme racial disparities in the criminal justice system, Such a policy will disproportionately deprive black people of their 2nd amendment rights.

And it wouldn’t have prevented most mass shootings, done predominantly by white men with no criminal records.

Now, perhaps such a policy could reduce gun violence overall, since if we make the net wide enough, we could prevent millions of people from buying guns based on their actions as kids.

But all of it still leaves the elephant in the room: military-grade weapons can be bought freely by just about anybody. Kyle Rittenhouse borrowed a gun. Semi-automatic weapons shouldn’t be ubiquitous… and when they are? Well, we see the results on the news every single week.

Red flag laws might be a small part of a solution, but there are far better steps that don’t involve holding juvenile records over people’s heads until their 30s. Because we KNOW who that will target. A black kid who got in a fight at an overly-policed school and ended up with a criminal record… while at another school, a white kid in a similar fight got an afternoon in detention instead.

Gun violence is literally the #1 cause of death for children in America. The idea that we can fix that by keeping guns away from the ”bad guys” is a fantasy, meant to protect gun manufacturer profits.


----------



## Spike

Herdfan said:


> Nope.  It was to allow citizens to rise up against a tyrannical government.  Remember, most of these colonists fled an oppressive King in England and were leery of government.  Remember Paul Revere?  He was riding to alert the citizens that the Redcoats were coming and the reason they were coming was to take the citizen's guns.



Here you go...   https://www.npr.org/2021/06/02/1002107670/historian-uncovers-the-racist-roots-of-the-2nd-amendment


----------



## fooferdoggie

JayMysteri0 said:


> _But it's for sport, it's for hunting, it's for...   _
> 
> We know what it's for.
> 
> Part of what helped the Sandy Hook families win their suit, was based on Remington's marketing.  Sue them into the pavement.



yep this is so blatant it should be easy.


----------



## SuperMatt

Spike said:


> Here you go...   https://www.npr.org/2021/06/02/1002107670/historian-uncovers-the-racist-roots-of-the-2nd-amendment



A great reminder that conservatives and the NRA are FOR gun restrictions when enough black people are openly carrying them around.



> And the police did not like having these aggressive Black men and women doing that work of policing the police. And the response was a thing called the Mulford Act, and the Mulford Act set out to ban open carrying of weapons. And it was drafted by a conservative assemblyman in California with the support and help of an NRA representative and eagerly signed by Gov. Ronald Reagan as a way to make illegal what the Panthers were legally doing.


----------



## Yoused

SuperMatt said:


> Red flag laws might be a small part of a solution, but there are far better steps that don’t involve holding juvenile records over people’s heads until their 30s. Because we KNOW who that will target.




Well, the thing about gun violence is that it involves _guns_. Who has the guns? We are not allowed to know that. The NRA has fought very had to make sure that this information is extremely difficult to obtain. Because, privacy. Or something. 

If we all had access to gun ownership information as easily as we have access to gun ownership, it might be more practical to keep an eye on who the next shootemup nutcase might be. But the gun (manufacturers) lobby insists an the privacy of its customers. Because, reasons.

(And, yes, I understand the concern about being targeted for theft. On the other hand, _it seems odd that you have purchased 46 AR-15s yet do not seem to own any and have never bought more than two small boxes of ammo_.)


----------



## Herdfan

SuperMatt said:


> That’s not the stated purpose of the amendment… written into the amendment itself. The stated purpose is for the “security of the state,” not for armed rebellion. If you look beyond just the text and at a bit of history, the idea of the 2nd amendment was to give states the ability to defend themselves, as they questioned the ability of the federal government to protect them well enough by itself.
> 
> It was never meant as a way for a group of citizens to rise up against the American government. Such a belief is dangerous and contrary to history. In my opinion, that mentality, pushed by gun lovers for decades, directly led to a mob of people thinking it was their right and duty to storm the Capitol, which was, in their eyes, representative of a ”tyrannical government” because they voted for the minority candidate in the most recent election.
> 
> Republicans calling Biden a tyrant + NRA messaging that the 2nd amendment is meant for them to overturn a tyrannical government? Sounds like a recipe for armed rebellion. This nonsense, not based in history, needs to stop.
> 
> And don’t forget, until 2008, court precedent made the 2nd amendment officially a collective right, not an individual one. And that 2008 decision was the narrowest possible (5-4) SCOTUS vote.




You can interpret _The Federalist 46 _how you want and I will interpret it as I want.  But one of the purposes of the 2A is to give local governments the power to rise up against a tyrannical federal government.  It was written by Madison who also proposed the 2A.

And before anyone starts in on the citizens can't go against tanks, you must not know ANYONE in the military.  There is no way they will turn on their own citizens.  They will join the citizens.


----------



## Herdfan

SuperMatt said:


> A great reminder that conservatives and the NRA are FOR gun restrictions when enough black people are openly carrying them around.




I am not.  The more legal minority gun owners, the better.


----------



## JayMysteri0

Herdfan said:


> You can interpret _The Federalist 46 _how you want and I will interpret it as I want.  But one of the purposes of the 2A is to give local governments the power to rise up against a tyrannical federal government.  It was written by Madison who also proposed the 2A.



I don't think Madison being the guy who proposed 2A, is quite the counter against it's use to continue or for slavery you imagine it is.



Herdfan said:


> And before anyone starts in on the citizens can't go against tanks, you must not know ANYONE in the military.  There is no way they will turn on their own citizens.  They will join the citizens.



Then what are the guns for?  Politicians in business suits who go too far?  That's a dangerous place to be.

Having known a few ( including family ) in the military, I know full well they may go against citizens.  Some reluctantly, some not.  Dependent on their interpretation of "their own citizens".  Which for some differs from others.  If you don't believe me, there's quite a few ex military ( oath keepers, 1%ers, and more  for example ) who still have brothers actively serving.  YOUR experience with the military & those in it, may differ than others.


----------



## Yoused

*from the first draft
Art. 5.   A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, being the best security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, but no one religiously scrupulous of bearing arms, shall be compelled to render military service in person.*​
Kind of reads a little differently from what was adopted.


----------



## SuperMatt

Herdfan said:


> But one of the purposes of the 2A is to give* local governments* the power to rise up against a tyrannical federal government



That‘s not what it says. The notion was that the state leaders were worried that the federal government wouldn’t do enough to protect them from other threats. Not that the federal government itself was a threat.

And we did once have a civil war, of local militias fighting against the “tyrannical” federal government who wanted to free their slaves. How did that work out? And is it a coincidence that there is a huge crossover of gun-rights activists and confederate flag flyers? Just something to consider.

But even if I were to buy into that interpretation, why shouldn’t all gun owners be required to join a local government militia if that’s the purpose of the 2A?


----------



## Herdfan

140,00/95,000* vs 45,000

Alcohol related deaths vs gun related deaths per year.

If everyone is actually concerned about gun deaths, then we need ban alcohol as well.  And that number doesn't even take into consideration the number of families destroyed by alcohol which will far outnumber families destroyed by guns (for reasons other than death).

So I am looking forward to everyone explaining why these deaths are OK and alcohol shouldn't be banned but guns should be.

Both have legitimate reasons to exist when used properly and responsibly, and both can have tragic results when used improperly or irresponsibly.  And just like guns, anyone can buy alcohol when they simply manage to breathe air for 7,665 days.  For every argument about how easy guns are to get, substitute alcohol for guns.

So if you are truly concerned about the deaths of innocent people, then you should absolutely advocate for banning alcohol.

Some more numbers.

Of the gun deaths:

54% were suicides ( I wonder how many people would have simply found another way)
43% were murders (How many of these were criminal vs criminal and not innocent bystanders or other victims)
3% were accidental, police related or undetermined.


Of alcohol deaths (hard to use percentages here given the disparate number who die due to alcohol)

10,842 died in car accidents, of which 61% of kids who died in alcohol related crashes, were in the car with the drunk driver
69.7% died of liver disease while 23.4% died from neuropsychiatric disorders (27.4%), such as alcohol dependence
64.9% of deaths occurred in people under 60 years of age, so not older people who were going to die in a few years anyway

And how many gun deaths were the result of alcohol?  I realize this is a chicken/egg scenario, but I would put my money on alcohol being more relevant factor.

One thing to note, our friends across the pond think the USA has a gun culture that they don't understand.  We also have an alcohol culture they probably won't understand either. In cases where the deaths in which alcohol was a “necessary cause” occurred in three of the most populated countries: the United States (36.9%), Brazil (24.8%) and Mexico (18.4%).  Why is the USA so much higher?

* CDC says 140,000, NIH says 95,000.  Big discrepancy and no idea why.


So you want my guns, I want your alcohol.  And if we both get our way, I will save more lives than you will.


----------



## fooferdoggie

Herdfan said:


> I am not.  The more legal minority gun owners, the better.



and the more the racists il freak out and attack them. and even in the right far more chance of losing to the law.


----------



## SuperMatt

Herdfan said:


> 140,00/95,000* vs 45,000
> 
> Alcohol related deaths vs gun related deaths per year.
> 
> If everyone is actually concerned about gun deaths, then we need ban alcohol as well.  And that number doesn't even take into consideration the number of families destroyed by alcohol which will far outnumber families destroyed by guns (for reasons other than death).
> 
> So I am looking forward to everyone explaining why these deaths are OK and alcohol shouldn't be banned but guns should be.
> 
> Both have legitimate reasons to exist when used properly and responsibly, and both can have tragic results when used improperly or irresponsibly.  And just like guns, anyone can buy alcohol when they simply manage to breathe air for 7,665 days.  For every argument about how easy guns are to get, substitute alcohol for guns.
> 
> So if you are truly concerned about the deaths of innocent people, then you should absolutely advocate for banning alcohol.
> 
> Some more numbers.
> 
> Of the gun deaths:
> 
> 54% were suicides ( I wonder how many people would have simply found another way)
> 43% were murders (How many of these were criminal vs criminal and not innocent bystanders or other victims)
> 3% were accidental, police related or undetermined.
> 
> 
> Of alcohol deaths (hard to use percentages here given the disparate number who die due to alcohol)
> 
> 10,842 died in car accidents, of which 61% of kids who died in alcohol related crashes, were in the car with the drunk driver
> 69.7% died of liver disease while 23.4% died from neuropsychiatric disorders (27.4%), such as alcohol dependence
> 64.9% of deaths occurred in people under 60 years of age, so not older people who were going to die in a few years anyway
> 
> And how many gun deaths were the result of alcohol?  I realize this is a chicken/egg scenario, but I would put my money on alcohol being more relevant factor.
> 
> One thing to note, our friends across the pond think the USA has a gun culture that they don't understand.  We also have an alcohol culture they probably won't understand either. In cases where the deaths in which alcohol was a “necessary cause” occurred in three of the most populated countries: the United States (36.9%), Brazil (24.8%) and Mexico (18.4%).  Why is the USA so much higher?
> 
> * CDC says 140,000, NIH says 95,000.  Big discrepancy and no idea why.
> 
> 
> So you want my guns, I want your alcohol.  And if we both get our way, I will save more lives than you will.



I think I got this as a chain email from somebody a couple years ago.


----------



## JayMysteri0

Herdfan said:


> 140,00/95,000* vs 45,000
> 
> Alcohol related deaths vs gun related deaths per year.
> 
> If everyone is actually concerned about gun deaths, then we need ban alcohol as well.  And that number doesn't even take into consideration the number of families destroyed by alcohol which will far outnumber families destroyed by guns (for reasons other than death).
> 
> So I am looking forward to everyone explaining why these deaths are OK and alcohol shouldn't be banned but guns should be.
> 
> Both have legitimate reasons to exist when used properly and responsibly, and both can have tragic results when used improperly or irresponsibly.  And just like guns, anyone can buy alcohol when they simply manage to breathe air for 7,665 days.  For every argument about how easy guns are to get, substitute alcohol for guns.
> 
> So if you are truly concerned about the deaths of innocent people, then you should absolutely advocate for banning alcohol.
> 
> Some more numbers.
> 
> Of the gun deaths:
> 
> 54% were suicides ( I wonder how many people would have simply found another way)
> 43% were murders (How many of these were criminal vs criminal and not innocent bystanders or other victims)
> 3% were accidental, police related or undetermined.
> 
> 
> Of alcohol deaths (hard to use percentages here given the disparate number who die due to alcohol)
> 
> 10,842 died in car accidents, of which 61% of kids who died in alcohol related crashes, were in the car with the drunk driver
> 69.7% died of liver disease while 23.4% died from neuropsychiatric disorders (27.4%), such as alcohol dependence
> 64.9% of deaths occurred in people under 60 years of age, so not older people who were going to die in a few years anyway
> 
> And how many gun deaths were the result of alcohol?  I realize this is a chicken/egg scenario, but I would put my money on alcohol being more relevant factor.
> 
> One thing to note, our friends across the pond think the USA has a gun culture that they don't understand.  We also have an alcohol culture they probably won't understand either. In cases where the deaths in which alcohol was a “necessary cause” occurred in three of the most populated countries: the United States (36.9%), Brazil (24.8%) and Mexico (18.4%).  Why is the USA so much higher?
> 
> * CDC says 140,000, NIH says 95,000.  Big discrepancy and no idea why.
> 
> 
> So you want my guns, I want your alcohol.  And if we both get our way, I will save more lives than you will.



What we are concerned with is the abominable realization that gun deaths exceeded automobile deaths as the leading cause of death of children.

Guns.  Not alcohol.  Not automobiles.  Guns.

Guns are being used to create the leading form of death for children.  A cause of death that has possible solutions, but because of politicians wanting a check, refuse to do what is necessary to protect those children.  Because of a fetish hidden behind a right, guns are a rising cause of death.  A cause that terrifies everyone.

A sort of okay try at a deflection though that's been tried before.


----------



## SuperMatt

Ted Cruz and Donald Trump piled up a bunch of lies and misleading statements at the NRA convention.









						Fact-Checking Trump and Cruz at the N.R.A. Convention
					

The former president and the Texas senator made inaccurate or misleading claims about the efficacy of gun restrictions, gun ownership trends and school shootings.




					www.nytimes.com
				



(paywall removed)

Gotta love Ted Cruz saying that the handgun ban in Chicago didn’t prevent murders there…



> Gun bans do not work. Look at Chicago. If they worked, Chicago wouldn’t be the murder hellhole that it has been for far too long.




Um…

The Supreme Court nullified that handgun ban a decade ago. 

Also, the 3 top cities for gun murders are in states with permissive gun laws: Jackson, Mississippi, Gary, Indiana, and St. Louis, Missouri.


----------



## Herdfan

SuperMatt said:


> I think I got this as a chain email from somebody a couple years ago.




Then you are mistaken.  I typed every single line of that up myself.


----------



## Herdfan

JayMysteri0 said:


> A sort of okay try at a deflection though that's been tried before.




It's not deflection.  If you truly care about the human toll of a product, then you need to care about alcohol as much as guns.  If not, then you simply don't like guns and only care about the human toll when it benefits you. 

As for deaths from automobiles, we NEED them.  No one needs alcohol.


----------



## Yoused

Herdfan said:


> As for deaths from automobiles, we NEED them. No one needs alcohol.



We have had automobiles for about 130 years, alcohol for probably 40 or 60 times that long. We got by fine without automobiles for a very, very long time and probably will again before too long. Alcohol is an optional cultural affect that we can get along without, but banning it (or cannibis, or opium or what you will) has not worked well.

As far as banning guns, that is not part of the conversation. _You_ suggested that, Mr. Strawdaddy.


----------



## JayMysteri0

Also, a common rebut to those attempts at tying


Herdfan said:


> It's not deflection.  If you truly care about the human toll of a product, then you need to care about alcohol as much as guns.  If not, then you simply don't like guns and only care about the human toll when it benefits you.
> 
> As for deaths from automobiles, we NEED them.  No one needs alcohol.



Yes, it is a deflection.

It's an idea that one can't be concerned about one thing unless they concerned about another thing.  If that is addressed, then one must be concerned with another thing.  Then another thing.  Then another thing.  So on & so one.  All the while nothing is done about the original thing, in the name of the latest deflection brought up by those who don't want the original issue addressed.

That's also ignoring as I tried to point a rather tired & repeated point that is almost at this point a cut & paste from another umpteen unoriginal reddit thread.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1530261919864483841/

I'll also skip to the next eventual talking point about gun laws & Chicago, which was addressed & debunked earlier with the post about 45 & Cruz lying at the NRA soiree

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1530261702830194688/

It seems the only time some people give a shit about alcohol & automobile deaths is when someone gets shot.  How does that make sense?     Unless it doesn't, and it's just another deflection.


----------



## AG_PhamD

SuperMatt said:


> How many of the mass shooters had a juvenile criminal record?
> 
> What is the racial demographic of those with juvenile criminal records? How many majority-black schools have police officers in the school vs how many majority-white schools have police in there?
> 
> Due to extreme racial disparities in the criminal justice system, Such a policy will disproportionately deprive black people of their 2nd amendment rights.
> 
> And it wouldn’t have prevented most mass shootings, done predominantly by white men with no criminal records.
> 
> Now, perhaps such a policy could reduce gun violence overall, since if we make the net wide enough, we could prevent millions of people from buying guns based on their actions as kids.
> 
> But all of it still leaves the elephant in the room: military-grade weapons can be bought freely by just about anybody. Kyle Rittenhouse borrowed a gun. Semi-automatic weapons shouldn’t be ubiquitous… and when they are? Well, we see the results on the news every single week.
> 
> Red flag laws might be a small part of a solution, but there are far better steps that don’t involve holding juvenile records over people’s heads until their 30s. Because we KNOW who that will target. A black kid who got in a fight at an overly-policed school and ended up with a criminal record… while at another school, a white kid in a similar fight got an afternoon in detention instead.
> 
> Gun violence is literally the #1 cause of death for children in America. The idea that we can fix that by keeping guns away from the ”bad guys” is a fantasy, meant to protect gun manufacturer profits.




Seriously man? You’re leading me to believe you’re arguing just for the sake of argument at this point.

You’ve gone from “guns should be as difficult to get as possible” to the sentiment “guns should not be allowed at all” (or at least confined to semi-automatic, which bans a tremendous amount of weapons, including the semi-auto pistol, the most popular self defense weapon) to now “gun control laws would violate second amendment rights”.  So which is it?

If you’re going to go with the latter argument, the existing laws that involve background checks would also (and in fact do to an extent) disproportionately affect the Black community’s 2A rights. So are you willing to loosen existing background check policy/procedure to prevent this?

This line of logic has a lot of other implications, but I won’t berate the point.

1. I couldn’t tell you. In 2015 the NYT claimed 6/15 of recent mass shooters had “run ins with the law”. I can’t tell you if that means arrests or convictions or just contact leading to no action. Some studies claim things like “most did not have a criminal record”- which is vague language, perhaps intentionally  in the sense that it highlights the very issue we’re talking about. If a record is sealed how would researchers even know it exists? I’m also not sure what “most” is either- 51%, 75% 99%?.

What often happens are these facts are stated without any reference or methodology- we have no idea how sealed records are considered, if they even thought to consider them at all. The fact then gets cited over and over again, or worse repeated without a citation. To further complicate things, terms are used very loosely or defined super specifically or not at all.

2) First, let’s remember keeping guns out of dangerous peoples hands also prevents many other gun-related crimes, not just school shootings. And school shootings account for a infinitesimal percent of gun related deaths and injury. These laws should ideally be applicable to all forms of gun violence.

3) Using data to help inform laws helps recognize and prevent unfair prejudices. While there are clearlt disparities in how the criminal justice system treats Black people, I’m not sure that _fully_ accounts for the difference in crime rates between cases. If that was the case, then Asians would receive the most preferential treatment. But that’s not to say race is directly responsible- rather it’s the consequences of a prevalent set of life circumstances common to large swaths of one group. But that’s a whole different problem and discussion

4. Maybe it’s more common to see more police in urban schools is because more crime occurs in urban areas- both outside the school and inside. Is bias a factor, sure. But do you think the murder rate in urban areas is artificially high compared to rural/suburban areas? The police presence in schools is changing quite quickly in rural/suburban areas btw. Typically arresting students is at the bottom of the roles of a SRO. In fact in some places they can’t- that’s being debated in Mass right now. As I understand they are there primarily to promote safety, especially from outside the school, as well as serve as a mentor and a resource students can seek for help in difficult situations.

4. While white students disproportionally commit mass school shootings, are you aware that minority students commit a disproportionate number of individually-targeted shootings on school grounds? They also have a higher chance of being involved in gangs/gang violence.

There are a number of instances where certain races have disproportionately high rates of specific crimes. Like Black people commit 55% of murders yet are ~13% of the population. Meanwhile White men comprise nearly all community-targeted mass shootings (including school shootings) as well as accounting for 90% of registered sex offenders against children. Why? I wish I knew. Hispanic-Americans are by far most likely to be involved in gangs and gang-related crimes. Asian-Americans commit very few violent crimes but have a disparate amount of suicides.

5) Gun homicide is the leading cause of black men under 55. Black males are 10-20x more likely to be killed by gun homicide than their white counterparts. Most murder victims are murdered by someone of the same race. So more sophisticated background checks are not going to help save lives in the Black community?

And to be clear, there’s a difference of a juvenile record, say being caught with drugs or driving without a license or drinking alcohol, etc (common juvenile charges) versus more serious crimes involving violence or illegal weapons possession.


----------



## SuperMatt

Herdfan said:


> Then you are mistaken.  I typed every single line of that up myself.



My apologies. As a musician I should have better appreciation of variations on a theme.



			Alcohol- vs. Firearm-Related Deaths – OregunFacts
		










						Guns far less dangerous than alcohol
					

In the wake of the Pulse nightclub tragedy in Orlando, Florida, numerous media pundits and concerned Americans have called for new, strict gun regulations, including expanded background checks and bans on gun sales made to anyone on the federal government’s “No-Fly List” or from the “Selectee...




					www.washingtontimes.com


----------



## Yoused

I suspect "feral hogs" is a euphemism for _something_, just not sure what,









						Sen. Bill Cassidy claims people need AR-15s to defend themselves from 'feral pigs,' inadvertently echoing an old meme about 'feral hogs'
					

"If you talk to the people that own it, killing feral pigs in ... Louisiana. They'll wonder: 'Why would you take it away from me?'" said Cassidy.




					www.businessinsider.com


----------



## Yoused

Dear Daniel,





[_redacted_]


----------



## fooferdoggie

Yoused said:


> Dear Daniel,
> 
> View attachment 14435
> 
> [_redacted_]



the same company that used a baby holding a ar 15???? I am sure you have los of thoughts and prayers while your stock goes up huh??? I hope they go down in flames big time.


----------



## Cmaier

fooferdoggie said:


> the same company that used a baby holding a ar 15???? I am sure you have los of thoughts and prayers while your stock goes up huh??? I hope they go down in flames big time.



They *want* you to know their gun was used. It’s free advertising. “if one 18 year old can use our gun to hold off a SWAT team for 90 minutes, just imagine what you can do to the woke mob that’s coming to remove your town’s racist statues!”


----------



## fooferdoggie

Cmaier said:


> They *want* you to know their gun was used. It’s free advertising. “if one 18 year old can use our gun to hold off a SWAT team for 90 minutes, just imagine what you can do to the woke mob that’s coming to remove your town’s racist statues!”



hope it costs them everything. How can you deny the whole pandering to the young with their ad?


----------



## Edd

It reads like they’re using “thoughts and prayers” sarcastically, like “fair and balanced”.


----------



## SuperMatt

Yoused said:


> Dear Daniel,
> 
> View attachment 14435
> 
> [_redacted_]



There is a vicious cycle that benefits gun manufacturers. A tragic shooting happens, leading to fear. Gun companies advertise their products as a solution, and people buy more… which leads to more shootings. And now we have more guns than we have people. That is messed up.


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1530521206377562115/

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1530603445736001536/

Perspective
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1530617022710702080/

Bonus
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1530640827310936064/


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1530702567344308225/


----------



## SuperMatt

AG_PhamD said:


> Seriously man? You’re leading me to believe you’re arguing just for the sake of argument at this point.
> 
> You’ve gone from “guns should be as difficult to get as possible” to the sentiment “guns should not be allowed at all” (or at least confined to semi-automatic, which bans a tremendous amount of weapons, including the semi-auto pistol, the most popular self defense weapon) to now “gun control laws would violate second amendment rights”.  So which is it?
> 
> If you’re going to go with the latter argument, the existing laws that involve background checks would also (and in fact do to an extent) disproportionately affect the Black community’s 2A rights. So are you willing to loosen existing background check policy/procedure to prevent this?
> 
> This line of logic has a lot of other implications, but I won’t berate the point.
> 
> 1. I couldn’t tell you. In 2015 the NYT claimed 6/15 of recent mass shooters had “run ins with the law”. I can’t tell you if that means arrests or convictions or just contact leading to no action. Some studies claim things like “most did not have a criminal record”- which is vague language, perhaps intentionally  in the sense that it highlights the very issue we’re talking about. If a record is sealed how would researchers even know it exists? I’m also not sure what “most” is either- 51%, 75% 99%?.
> 
> What often happens are these facts are stated without any reference or methodology- we have no idea how sealed records are considered, if they even thought to consider them at all. The fact then gets cited over and over again, or worse repeated without a citation. To further complicate things, terms are used very loosely or defined super specifically or not at all.
> 
> 2) First, let’s remember keeping guns out of dangerous peoples hands also prevents many other gun-related crimes, not just school shootings. And school shootings account for a infinitesimal percent of gun related deaths and injury. These laws should ideally be applicable to all forms of gun violence.
> 
> 3) Using data to help inform laws helps recognize and prevent unfair prejudices. While there are clearlt disparities in how the criminal justice system treats Black people, I’m not sure that _fully_ accounts for the difference in crime rates between cases. If that was the case, then Asians would receive the most preferential treatment. But that’s not to say race is directly responsible- rather it’s the consequences of a prevalent set of life circumstances common to large swaths of one group. But that’s a whole different problem and discussion
> 
> 4. Maybe it’s more common to see more police in urban schools is because more crime occurs in urban areas- both outside the school and inside. Is bias a factor, sure. But do you think the murder rate in urban areas is artificially high compared to rural/suburban areas? The police presence in schools is changing quite quickly in rural/suburban areas btw. Typically arresting students is at the bottom of the roles of a SRO. In fact in some places they can’t- that’s being debated in Mass right now. As I understand they are there primarily to promote safety, especially from outside the school, as well as serve as a mentor and a resource students can seek for help in difficult situations.
> 
> 4. While white students disproportionally commit mass school shootings, are you aware that minority students commit a disproportionate number of individually-targeted shootings on school grounds? They also have a higher chance of being involved in gangs/gang violence.
> 
> There are a number of instances where certain races have disproportionately high rates of specific crimes. Like Black people commit 55% of murders yet are ~13% of the population. Meanwhile White men comprise nearly all community-targeted mass shootings (including school shootings) as well as accounting for 90% of registered sex offenders against children. Why? I wish I knew. Hispanic-Americans are by far most likely to be involved in gangs and gang-related crimes. Asian-Americans commit very few violent crimes but have a disparate amount of suicides.
> 
> 5) Gun homicide is the leading cause of black men under 55. Black males are 10-20x more likely to be killed by gun homicide than their white counterparts. Most murder victims are murdered by someone of the same race. So more sophisticated background checks are not going to help save lives in the Black community?
> 
> And to be clear, there’s a difference of a juvenile record, say being caught with drugs or driving without a license or drinking alcohol, etc (common juvenile charges) versus more serious crimes involving violence or illegal weapons possession.



Before I take this back to red flag laws, I want to mention that for the past 2 years, there has been an intense national conversation about the racial disparities in policing. I believe most of those discussions have come to different conclusions than what you’ve put forward above, especially once you get to point 3 and beyond. So, I’d suggest if you want to question those conclusions, that you pick one of the many threads here on that topic, which offer much better context.

The point I’m making on red flag laws:

Red flag laws won’t stop most shootings, and the more intrusive we make them, the more people will be flagged that don’t need to be flagged.

And focusing only on red flag laws misses the real problem: we have too many guns, especially too many military-style semi-automatic weapons in America. Until we tackle that, things are unlikely to get better.


----------



## Herdfan

Yoused said:


> I suspect "feral hogs" is a euphemism for _something_, just not sure what,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sen. Bill Cassidy claims people need AR-15s to defend themselves from 'feral pigs,' inadvertently echoing an old meme about 'feral hogs'
> 
> 
> "If you talk to the people that own it, killing feral pigs in ... Louisiana. They'll wonder: 'Why would you take it away from me?'" said Cassidy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.businessinsider.com




Not if they are in Texas.  Feral hogs are a huge problem for farmers.


----------



## JayMysteri0

I did ask Texas + police to do better, and the police stepped up... badly.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1530752937638739969/

Like I've said before, I think due to their own bubble, they can't realize it comes across "fear for our lives" first & foremost.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1530623420165144582/


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1530650529491206144/

Sooooooo close to reaching that realization


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Herdfan said:


> I think you are putting too much on the GOP.  There are plenty of Dems who would not vote for gun restrictions.  I mean the Dems had control of Congress AND 60 votes in the Senate AND Obama.  Why didn't they pass gun control then?  They passed the ACA which cost many members their seats.  So why not pass gun control?




I think it’s the same reason they didn’t codify Roe v Wade.  The Democrat establishment is way more interested in winning over the center right voters, or at least not antagonizing them, than serving their traditional base.  So gun control and abortion are off the table.  They’ll still give lip service to some issues, but passing legislation?  Forget about it.  Unfortunately for them to those on the right or even right of center, giving lip service is the same thing as actually passing legislation. So they lose on both accounts.  At this point they can barely even mumble there traditional support for anything unless the right takes some extreme stance or measure.  But when it comes to actual legislation it’s either nothing or some sad watered down token bill.

I know from your view that you probably see this as an acceptable compromise that fits your values, but essentially it would be like the GOP building a 4 ft tall chainlink fence on the southern border and reducing your taxes by $1 a month.  I don’t think you’d be singing the praises of GOP compromises there.


----------



## Herdfan

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> I think it’s the same reason they didn’t codify Roe v Wade.  The Democrat establishment is way more interested in winning over the center right voters, or at least not antagonizing them, than serving their traditional base.




Given our current party makeup, they have no choice.  Both parties are controlled by the more extreme members, but they also know they their positions are not always popular with enough voters to get them elected.  So they have to try an entice the middle to vote for them.  It is the only way they keep power.

I look forward to the day when the middle 60% of the country forms its own party and kicks the outside 20%'s to the curb.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Herdfan said:


> Given our current party makeup, they have no choice.  Both parties are controlled by the more extreme members, but they also know they their positions are not always popular with enough voters to get them elected.  So they have to try an entice the middle to vote for them.  It is the only way they keep power.
> 
> I look forward to the day when the middle 60% of the country forms its own party and kicks the outside 20%'s to the curb.




I think that maybe the extremes of both sides get the most coverage but when it comes to implemented policy the right takes the cake for getting things done. I think the GOP is in a perpetual state of shock on what they are actually getting done in that they have to constantly do damage control or come up with increasingly preposterous justifications.  Taking their stances is supposed to just get votes driven by the fear bandwagon. They aren’t supposed to actually do anything about Because eventually with all their scapegoats squashed they are going to have to start governing, especially economically, and on that they’re got nothing in the hopper. We’re well past the point of thinking lowering taxes is going to solve our economic problems.  They’ve done all the favors they can for big business (with some help from Democrats) and there’s nothing left that the middle and lower classes won’t get burned in the process.


----------



## JayMysteri0

Some of these guys are still NOT getting it, that they've worn the old excuses out...

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1530660149886701571/
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1530660787974307840/
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1530922957547220998/
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1530662328122810368/

Note the biggest expenditure.  Money well spent?  Some in the city maybe reconsidering.  I've said it before in other threads, only one part of a city's gov't consistently gets increases while others get the cuts.

This really can become the tipping in Texas.  Especially if the predictions about their power grid is true, and upcoming weather.


----------



## JayMysteri0

JayMysteri0 said:


> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1530521206377562115/



Update:
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1530988134569193472/


----------



## JayMysteri0

And... The "I did NOT F'N know this" part of thread

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1530747605281554433/

So let me get this straight, a person buys items designed for killing, and they can get it on credit?  Even if they don't plan on surviving the reason they brought the items?

Bonus astonishment:

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1530882665267740673/


----------



## Yoused

And since it is Memorial Day weekend in US, there should be celebratory gunfire









						Oklahoma festival ends in a mass shooting — one is dead
					

Another day in America brought another mass shooting. This time it was in the town of Taft, Oklahoma, where at least one is dead and seven others are injured. The Memorial Day celebration in the town was shattered by at least 40 shots fired. Of the seven injured, at least two were children...




					www.rawstory.com


----------



## Cmaier

JayMysteri0 said:


> And... The "I did NOT F'N know this" part of thread
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1530747605281554433/
> 
> So let me get this straight, a person buys items designed for killing, and they can get it on credit?  Even if they don't plan on surviving the reason they brought the items?
> 
> Bonus astonishment:
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1530882665267740673/



You can;t buy pot in california with a credit card. Let’s get on the banks to put a stop to this.


----------



## Eric

Beto is right to capitalize on this, Republicans will not change anything nor accept any accountability. If the people want it, they' have to vote these people out.









						Texas Gov. Greg Abbott booed upon arriving at Uvalde school shooting site
					

"Our children are under constant attack in this community. We need help," one resident shouted at the Republican governor on Sunday.




					www.newsweek.com


----------



## JayMysteri0

Eric said:


> Beto is right to capitalize on this, Republicans will not change anything nor accept any accountability. If the people want it, they' have to vote these people out.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Texas Gov. Greg Abbott booed upon arriving at Uvalde school shooting site
> 
> 
> "Our children are under constant attack in this community. We need help," one resident shouted at the Republican governor on Sunday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com



As I've said, I really hope this is a turning point.

Nothing is worth the lives lost, but if change finally does begin perhaps something will help to make up for it.

Too many lives have been lost due to the indifference of others who believe they won't be affected their choices & inaction.

Anyone trying the whole "it's politicizing things" should stop.  That ship sailed lives / years ago.


----------



## Citysnaps

I think it needs to be made crystal clear that dead school children have been reduced to mere adverse consequences by no-limitations ownership politicians and gun owners.


----------



## mac_in_tosh

I don't know if this report from 2018 has been mentioned yet, but it showed how guns are everywhere in Switzerland but they don't have the crime the U.S. does. It showed a shooting event that even kids took part in and where beer was liberally served. One of the people being interviewed turned out to be the former president of Switzerland - he was just there like everyone else without any special protection. Apparently Switzerland did have a mass shooting years ago but they immediately took steps that have been successful in preventing any further occurrences. Where there's a will there's a way.

Switzerland: So Many Guns, No Mass Shootings | The Daily Show


----------



## Yoused

Cmaier said:


> You can;t buy pot in california with a credit card. Let’s get on the banks to put a stop to this.



Did you read the text? It appears that no banks were involved – the gun shop owner apparently just gave him the guns on spec (probably with a payment contract, for a morsel of earnst). Hopefully this will bite him hard on the soft parts.


----------



## Cmaier

Yoused said:


> Did you read the text? It appears that no banks were involved – the gun shop owner apparently just gave him the guns on spec (probably with a payment contract, for a morsel of earnst). Hopefully this will bite him hard on the soft parts.



Oh Really? I didn;t read it. That’s even crazier.  So, technically, the gun shop owner owned the murder weapons?


----------



## Yoused

Cmaier said:


> Oh Really? I didn;t read it. That’s even crazier.  So, technically, the gun shop owner owned the murder weapons?



Unfortunately, we do not confer responsibility based on ownership or he would be in it deep.


----------



## fooferdoggie

No one I responsible but doors and gays and democrats.


----------



## SuperMatt

fooferdoggie said:


> No one I responsible but doors and gays and democrats.



I read some right-winger blaming Beto O’Rourke for making Republicans mad, and say he is the reason we won’t get gun control legislation.


----------



## SuperMatt

Let’s not get our hopes up too high, because one of these Republicans is from NY State, and another is persona non grata because he dared to tell the truth about the 2020 election. However, some Republicans are talking about doing something about guns.



> NRA-endorsed Rep. Chris Jacobs (R-N.Y.) broke with the GOP last week and said he now would support an assault weapons ban, magazine capacity limits, raising the age to be able to purchase guns from 18 to 21, and other gun restrictions. The recent shootings in Buffalo and in Uvalde forced him to reevaluate his position on guns, Jacobs told the Buffalo News.






> Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.), whose NRA rating went from an “A” to an “F” after he called for a ban on bump stocks following a mass shooting at a Las Vegas music festival, on Sunday blasted the NRA as a “grifting scam.”
> Kinzinger said raising the age for gun purchases to 21 years old is “a no-brainer,” and said he was open to regulations or even a ban on AR-15s.




Dear God, please let there be at least 10 Republicans in the Senate who will do some of the things suggested by Jacobs and Kinzinger above. This problem can’t be solved overnight, but we cannot let more children die to appease the gun extremists.


----------



## JayMysteri0

I really hope that change is coming

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1530965511651065862/


> Abbott booed at Uvalde memorial site: ‘We need change’
> 
> 
> Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) arrived at Robb Elementary School on Sunday to a crowd of booing onlookers, days after a gunman entered the school in Uvalde, Texas, and slaughtered 19 children and two t…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thehill.com





> Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) arrived at Robb Elementary School on Sunday to a crowd of booing onlookers, days after a gunman entered the school in Uvalde, Texas and slaughtered 19 children and two teachers.
> 
> As Abbott approached the memorial, the crowd — composed of both local Uvalde residents and people from other areas — booed the governor, according to videos posted online.
> 
> “Please Gov. Abbott help Uvalde county,” one onlooker shouted. “We need change! We need change, governor!”





> Abbott’s arrival came on the same day that President Joe Biden and First Lady Jill Biden visited the scene of the massacre. The Bidens were greeted with cheers before they laid flowers at the memorial.
> 
> The first couple then went to Mass at Sacred Heart Catholic Church, before someone shouted “Do something!” as they left the service.
> 
> “We will,” Biden said in response.
> 
> Abbott has also said he expects new laws to be enacted as a result of the elementary school shooting. But when pressed for detail about those measures, Abbott’s response centered on mental health, not gun reform.




A reminder of why no one is giving a shit about Abbott's claims about anything, especially if he has the nerve to utter the "mental health" excuse.



> Gov. Abbott’s Mental Health Cuts Under Scrutiny After Deadly School Shooting
> 
> 
> In the wake of mass fatalities at a Texas school, Gov. Greg Abbott speculated that the gunman had mental health issues and called for more to be done. But last month, Abbott slashed $211 million fr…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> khn.org




I think it's going to be about that time for another ginned up bit of political theatre in Texas.

Let's hope no one's having it, because this sort of thing doesn't seem to stop






https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1530928940323323904/


----------



## SuperMatt

One gun safety law isn’t going to fix this. It’s going to take a long campaign.









						Opinion | The Hard Truth: Gun Safety Must Be Everything That Republicans Fear
					

Republicans worry that gun safety laws could lead to national gun registries, insurance requirements and bans. I hope they do.




					www.nytimes.com
				



(paywall removed)



> I understand that Republicans are the opposition, that they have come to accept staggering levels of death as the price they must pay to advance their political agenda on everything from Covid to guns.
> 
> But I am on the same page as they are on one point. They see the passage of gun safety laws as a slippery slope that could lead to more sweeping laws and even, one day, national gun registries, insurance requirements and bans. I see the same and I actively hope for it.
> 
> When I hear Democratic politicians contorting their statements so it sounds like they’re promoting gun ownership while also promoting gun safety, I’m not only mystified, I’m miffed.
> 
> Why can’t everyone just be upfront? We have too many guns. We need to begin to get some of them out of circulation. That may include gun buybacks, but it must include no longer selling weapons of war to civilians.


----------



## fooferdoggie

this proves good guys get guns and become bad guys.


----------



## JayMysteri0

The stat that can never be highlighted enough...



> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Guns Per Capita 2022
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> worldpopulationreview.com





> According to the Small Arms Survey of 2017, the United States had a population size of around 326,474,000 people. There were about 393 million firearms in the United States, meaning that there were far more guns than there are people. Additionally, given that not every person in the U.S. owns a gun, many people own multiple or many. This fact still rings true, with the only major difference being that the United States population and the number of guns in the nation have grown in size.
> 
> Back in 2017, for every one hundred people in the United States, there were one hundred twenty firearms in the hands of the general public. Of the 393 million firearms in the U.S., only 6.06 million of them are registered.




More guns then there are people in the United States, and NOT every person actually owns A firearm.

With that in mind, ...WTF?!

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1530958095727226880/
_On the roof?  Why are you putting guns on your roof?_

and, Twitter

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1531122290523447297/


----------



## SuperMatt

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1530358898967855104/

This is a succinct summation of what I was saying in previous posts about police in schools, and is another reason why “red flag” laws based on juvenile records would target the wrong people.


----------



## mac_in_tosh

Does that creep Ted Cruz also think there should be armed guards in supermarkets, to prevent a reoccurrence of what happened in Buffalo?


----------



## JayMysteri0

mac_in_tosh said:


> Does that creep Ted Cruz also think there should be armed guards in supermarkets, to prevent a reoccurrence of what happened in Buffalo?



Fled wisely realizing his attempts at making doors with an armed officer the newest solution wasn't working, he pivoted to an old favorite.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1530942361009790976/

It's those "darn liberal elites" everyone should be mad at.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1531116698551697408/

Unfortunately for some, they aren't buying that crap either.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1530564365484695554/


----------



## JayMysteri0

I see this trending, and it is NOT a pretty subject

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1531293459851911170/

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1531244151110520832/

This is really going to lead to some ugly conversations.


----------



## Herdfan

Cmaier said:


> Let’s get on the banks to put a stop to this.




What can the banks do?  If they are the ones offering the credit and the terms, the banks aren't even involved.


----------



## Runs For Fun

JayMysteri0 said:


> I see this trending, and it is NOT a pretty subject
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1531293459851911170/
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1531244151110520832/
> 
> This is really going to lead to some ugly conversations.



What in the ever living fuck?


----------



## Yoused

fooferdoggie said:


> No one I responsible but doors and gays and democrats.



Hey, be careful around those evil doors, they have a powerful, mysterious field that makes you forget what you were doing. We put locks on them to protect ourselves from their mischievious ways.


----------



## SuperMatt

The NRA uses a very deliberate strategy I hadn’t heard of before: agnotology. It is a strategy also used by the tobacco companies and fossil fuel companies.



> Within the sociology of knowledge, *agnotology* (formerly *agnatology*) is the study of deliberate, culturally-induced ignorance or doubt, typically to sell a product or win favour, particularly through the publication of inaccurate or misleading scientific data.[2][3] More generally, the term also highlights the condition where more knowledge of a subject leaves one more uncertain than before.




Here’s how it’s used by the gun lobby. Everything from refusing to study gun violence, to refusing to define “assault weapon,” to nit-picking terminology about different kinds of weapons... it’s all a deliberate strategy, and is laid out in this thread.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1530539080823492608/

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1530539090214625281/



> Agnotology works for conservatives, in part, because Enlightenment values often push progressives and liberals into attempting to impose evidence-based logic on political arguments. But if your opponent doesn't play by those rules, you can't possibly have an argument with them.




In other words? It might be pointless to argue with gun-rights advocates because their “arguments” are *intentionally* disingenuous. It’s not that they are uninformed... they intentionally try to cast doubt where there should be none, and try to prevent honest discussion of the data and the best solution(s) to the problem.


----------



## SuperMatt

Canada shows it’s possible to do something about gun violence.









						Canada Moves To Freeze Handgun Sales, Buy Back Assault-Style Weapons
					

“We need only look south of the border to know that if we do not take action, firmly and rapidly, it gets worse and worse," Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said.




					www.huffpost.com


----------



## Roller

After being shown that his pronouncement that hammers kill more people than guns is false, this idiot immediately pivots to his "2A rights."

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1531651480180121603/


----------



## SuperMatt

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1530989948651950082/

First it was the easily disproven “mental health” lie. Now it’s the disproven lie that they want to keep guns away from the “bad guys.”


----------



## Yoused

SuperMatt said:


> their “arguments” are *intentionally* disingenuous



If you remember how it was in PRSI, all you had to do was say "the guy had a 30-round clip" and the next 5 pages of the thread would be the ammosexuals tearing you apart for saying "clip" when you should have said "magazine". I have learned more detail about firearms in the past decade than I ever wanted to know.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

SuperMatt said:


> Canada shows it’s possible to do something about gun violence.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Canada Moves To Freeze Handgun Sales, Buy Back Assault-Style Weapons
> 
> 
> “We need only look south of the border to know that if we do not take action, firmly and rapidly, it gets worse and worse," Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com












						Republicans cry “communism” after Canada cracks down on guns
					

Republicans are freaking out after Canada responded to a mass shooting with actual gun restrictions.




					www.salon.com
				




Holy shit with the hyperbole.  I was totally unaware that Canada and New Zealand are considered communist dystopias.  They should probably keep the rhetoric to non-English speaking brown people countries.  I don't know if many people are going to buy their bullshit aiming outside those parameters.


----------



## Cmaier

Oops. Can‘t blame the teacher?









						Texas DPS says teacher closed propped-open door before attack but it was not locked — ABC News
					

Law enforcement is looking into why the door didn't lock, DPS told ABC News.




					apple.news


----------



## Citysnaps

SuperMatt said:


> Canada shows it’s possible to do something about gun violence.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Canada Moves To Freeze Handgun Sales, Buy Back Assault-Style Weapons
> 
> 
> “We need only look south of the border to know that if we do not take action, firmly and rapidly, it gets worse and worse," Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com



Amazing.  Just like that!


----------



## JayMysteri0

Cmaier said:


> Oops. Can‘t blame the teacher?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Texas DPS says teacher closed propped-open door before attack but it was not locked — ABC News
> 
> 
> Law enforcement is looking into why the door didn't lock, DPS told ABC News.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news



Is anyone shocked when the police change their stories anymore?  I said the first time the police started floating that story, it was to throw the teacher under the bus, and throw off attention towards themselves.

Is anyone shocked by the newest activities?



> Uvalde police, school district no longer cooperating with Texas probe of shooting: Sources
> 
> 
> Uvalde police and school district police are no longer cooperating with the Texas Dept. of Public Safety's probe into the Robb Elementary School shooting, sources say.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abcnews.go.com





> The Uvalde Police Department and the Uvalde Independent School District police force are no longer cooperating with the Texas Department of Public Safety's investigation into the massacre at Robb Elementary School and the state's review of the law enforcement response, multiple law enforcement sources tell ABC News.
> 
> The Uvalde police chief and a spokesperson for the Uvalde Independent School District did not immediately respond to requests for comment from ABC News.
> 
> According to sources, the decision to stop cooperating occurred soon after the director of DPS, Col. Steven McCraw, held a news conference Friday during which he said the delayed police entry into the classroom was "the wrong decision" and contrary to protocol.
> 
> Reached by ABC News, a spokesperson for the Texas Department of Public Safety said, "The Uvalde Police Department and Uvalde CISD Police have been cooperating with investigators. The chief of the Uvalde CISD Police provided an initial interview but has not responded to a request for a follow-up interview with the Texas Rangers that was made two days ago."




I said there might be a storm coming.

What's more shameless?








> Uvalde school district police chief sworn in as city council member a week after mass shooting
> 
> 
> Pete Arredondo, the Uvalde school district police chief who officials last week identified as the incident commander during the Robb Elementary school shooting, was sworn in as a city council member on Tuesday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com





> Pete Arredondo, the Uvalde school district police chief who officials last week identified as the incident commander during the Robb Elementary school shooting, was sworn in as a city council member on Tuesday.
> 
> "Out of respect for the families who buried their children today, and who are planning to bury their children in the next few days, no ceremony was held," Mayor Don McLaughlin said in a statement.
> 
> Nineteen children and two teachers were killed in the attack last Tuesday. Arredondo was identified by the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) as the person who decided not to breach the school classroom where the shooter had holed up and instead stand back and wait for reinforcements.
> 
> Though DPS Director Steven McCraw did not identify Arredondo by name, he said the chief made the "wrong decision" not to engage with the gunman sooner.
> 
> The mayor originally said Monday that the special city council meeting "will not take place as scheduled, adding "our focus on Tuesday is on our families who lost loved ones."
> 
> Although there was no formal ceremony, McLaughlin said that members of the council came to City Hall "at their convenience" during the day to be sworn in, adding that Arredondo did appear in person to receive the oath and sign paperwork.
> Enter your email to subscribe to the CNN Five Things Newsletter.
> 
> Arredondo was elected to the council earlier this month. In his Monday statement, the mayor said Arredondo was "duly elected" and that there is "nothing in the City Charter, Election Code, or Texas Constitution that prohibits him from taking the oath of office. To our knowledge, we are currently not aware of any investigation of Mr. Arredondo."
> No response to follow-up interview request​The law enforcement response -- and the chief's decision not to confront the shooter -- has come under fire as new details of the tragedy emerge, including that terrified students called 911 from inside the class begging for help while officers stood in the hallway.
> 
> On Sunday, the Justice Department announced it will conduct a review of the law enforcement response to the shooting at the mayor's request.
> 
> Meanwhile, the DPS said Tuesday that Arredondo has not responded to a request for a follow-up interview with the Texas Rangers, who are investigating the massacre.
> 
> The school's police department and the Uvalde police department are "still cooperating," but there has not been a recent response from Arredondo to a request for another interview with investigators, DPS spokesperson Travis Considine told CNN.


----------



## The-Real-Deal82

I’ve been engaging with people on the gun topic on twitter over the last week and my personal favourite quotes are:

- ‘I’m a nonbeliever in god so am filled with hate because I want to take away guns’.

- ‘Mass shootings in American schools are nothing compared to the knife epidemic the UK has’. (Yeah, that’s actually a common claim). 

- ‘America will end up like Ukraine if we give up our guns’.

- ‘Nazi Germany rose to power because everybody had handed in their guns’. Yep quite a few Americans seem to believe that! 

- ‘There’s a lack of mental healthcare so people end up murdering kids in schools’. Funny, they don’t seem to do this in other western countries.

- ‘Abortion is murder, but kids being murdered in their class is the polices fault. Hands off my guns’. 


Had some classics and probably too many to summarise. These people are living up to the messed up American stereotypes and I can imagine for sane Americans it’s all rather frustrating.


----------



## GermanSuplex

Interesting comment from Justice Alito in an unrelated case…

_Alito wrote a dissent, arguing, "It is not at all obvious how our existing precedents, which predate the age of the internet, should apply to large social media companies."_

Link - Supreme Court blocks Texas’ controversial social media law

Gee, sure would be great if we could apply that logic to a certain amendment, but oddly enough, another court case surrounding the second amendment lead Alito and others to the exact opposite conclusion, that the 2A protects all of these weapons that didn’t exist all those ages ago.

Seems to me this is much like a case of convicting Trump for his numerous crimes - everyone is scared to do it because there’s no precedent for dealing with an out of control dimwit as president or ex-president. The Supreme Court has sort of punted this issue too because their rulings shift slightly depending on the case. Time for congress to act, and stop fearing the vociferous minority of people who want unregulated guns.


----------



## SuperMatt

JayMysteri0 said:


> Is anyone shocked when the police change their stories anymore?  I said the first time the police started floating that story, it was to throw the teacher under the bus, and throw off attention towards themselves.
> 
> Is anyone shocked by the newest activities?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I said there might be a storm coming.
> 
> What's more shameless?



Wait, the school has its own *police department* and this still happened? Is anybody stupid enough to continue suggesting that “good guys with guns” is a fix to the mass shooting problem? This school literally did everything that the gun fetishists suggested (and more), and it didn’t only fail to help… it made their response to the tragedy worse.

In a life-or-death emergency like this, the SCHOOL police department takes the lead? WTF? Sounds to me like this school police chief is a popular guy (since he got voted onto the city council) so him being in charge of the response was a political decision. That is disgusting.

What is sad to me is that the response was so flawed and that there seems to be major problems with Uvalde’s police department and government. Unfortunately, gun humpers will totally focus on that and tell everybody to fix that instead of fixing the problem of having 400,000,000 guns in America.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

BREAKING NEWS: Republicans concede that it doesn't take 1 good guy with a gun to stop 1 bad guy with a gun.  It takes 12 good guys with guns to stop 1 bad guy with a gun.  So we need more guns to arm those 12 good guys.  Let it not be said that reasonable Republicans don't compromise.


----------



## JayMysteri0

When it comes to the police in this instance, call it what it is.

"Fear for my life" is the ultimate defense & call to action for some officers to kill AN unarmed PoC.  "Fear for my life" is the ultimate defense & call to inaction for more than a dozen officers to face AN equally armed individual.

Which is why we need teachers to take up arms as well.






It's the fucking guns people.  It's also the people.  With the guns and in the police.


----------



## Eric

I took this yesterday in Rocklin, CA. Speaks volumes.


----------



## JayMysteri0

To consider

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1531824942232358912/

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1529918064271106050/
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1529918070633865216/
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1529918080289148928/


----------



## Yoused

My view, not surprisingly, lands opposite that of Scalia's. To begin with, the commas make the two middle clauses modifiers: the primary meaning is "_A well regulated Militia … shall not be infringed_", the inner parts modifying that. It is the way English works.

Moreover, one should consider the quaiifier in the second inner clause, "_… the right of the people to keep and bear Arms …_". How does that clause read if you remove that qualifier? The qualifier makes the keeping/bearing right a _collective_ right, as opposed to the individual right that would be obvious without it.

2A was clearly about setting up a mechanism for Americans to abide in absence of a standing army, which the founders opposed. One might realistically propose that the 5-sided MIC stands in conflict with the very Constitution it is sworn to defend.


----------



## GermanSuplex

Another mass shooting, this time at a Tulsa hospital. 3-4 dead, including the shooter. Ugh.

*A segment covering and discussing the recent mass shootings was interrupted to cover a mass shooting in Tulsa. If that isn’t uniquely American, what is?


----------



## SuperMatt

Canada, Australia, and the UK are not communist hellholes. They actually did something to get rid of their guns. WTF is wrong with people doing everything in their power to stop that from happening in America? Ban sales of all semi-automatic weapons and handguns. Have a mandatory buy-back. After a year, if you haven’t sold back your AR-15, you go to jail.



> My view, not surprisingly, lands opposite that of Scalia's. To begin with, the commas make the two middle clauses modifiers: the primary meaning is "_A well regulated Militia … shall not be infringed_", the inner parts modifying that. It is the way English works.
> 
> Moreover, one should consider the quaiifier in the second inner clause, "_… the right of the people to keep and bear Arms …_". How does that clause read if you remove that qualifier? The qualifier makes the keeping/bearing right a _collective_ right, as opposed to the individual right that would be obvious without it.
> 
> 2A was clearly about setting up a mechanism for Americans to abide in absence of a standing army, which the founders opposed. One might realistically propose that the 5-sided MIC stands in conflict with the very Constitution it is sworn to defend.




I agree 100%. The 2nd amendment is not Carte Blanche for individuals to have unlimited military arsenals. The 2008 Heller decision was a terrible legal decision, an overturning of over 200 years of precedent, a butchering of the English language, and a heartless power grab by judges that don’t care when children get gunned down. But even that ridiculous decision allows for government regulation. And banning semi-automatic weapons and handguns are reasonable government regulations.









						The Second Amendment Is a Gun-Control Amendment
					

There is no need to amend the Constitution, or to alter the historical understanding of what the Second Amendment meant.




					www.newyorker.com


----------



## Yoused

Charges against a 96-year-old man, who assassinated an employee at his assisted living facility because he thought the employee had been stealing money from him, have been dropped because the man is paranoid and psychotic (not competent to stand trial). He was not supposed to have a gun at the facility, but he carried a pistol in a bag on his walker, and people seemed to know about it.


----------



## GermanSuplex

Yoused said:


> Charges against a 96-year-old man, who assassinated an employee at his assisted living facility because he thought the employee had been stealing money from him, have been dropped because the man is paranoid and psychotic (not competent to stand trial). He was not supposed to have a gun at the facility, but he carried a pistol in a bag on his walker, and people seemed to know about it.




Nursing home is complicit if any staff knew about it and did nothing.


----------



## SuperMatt

When Americans saw Russian soldiers were killing in schools and hospitals, many wanted us to go in, risk nuclear war, and attack Russia because those are war crimes. But in our own country, those same things are happening regularly and we aren’t even allowed to DISCUSS banning military-style weapons? Shame on every politician who opposes getting military-style weapons off the streets.


----------



## Joe

I saw a teacher on Tik Tok say she wasn’t risking her life for her students. She said she’s not jumping in front of a bullet for these students if a mass shooter arrives. She said parents expect teachers to do everything and then want to arm them while they are already overworked and underpaid. Parents want to do everything except tackle the real problem. She said she’s not risking her life and then have her daughter grow up without a mother while these parents get to have their kids and life because they expect her to sacrifice her life. She didn’t sign up for that. 

I 100% support her.


----------



## Deleted member 215

It's pretty ironic seeing Republicans talk about arming teachers--teachers that they hate and consider to be pedophile groomers--now all-of-a-sudden they want to arm them because they have to say _something _about these shootings that's more than "thoughts and prayers" but doesn't go after guns.


----------



## SuperMatt

Joe said:


> I saw a teacher on Tik Tok say she wasn’t risking her life for her students. She said she’s not jumping in front of a bullet for these students if a mass shooter arrives. She said parents expect teachers to do everything and then want to arm them while they are already overworked and underpaid. Parents want to do everything except tackle the real problem. She said she’s not risking her life and then have her daughter grow up without a mother while these parents get to have their kids and life because they expect her to sacrifice her life. She didn’t sign up for that.
> 
> I 100% support her.



Maybe every teacher union in America could go on strike until assault weapons are banned. If we just rely on the politicians to act, it may never happen.


----------



## AG_PhamD

GermanSuplex said:


> Another mass shooting, this time at a Tulsa hospital. 3-4 dead, including the shooter. Ugh.
> 
> *A segment covering and discussing the recent mass shootings was interrupted to cover a mass shooting in Tulsa. If that isn’t uniquely American, what is?




Terrible. Obviously these mass shooting atrocities must be reported, but all to often they inspire more of the same.

Unfortunately hospital shootings are not that uncommon. And then there are the exorbitant number of assaults that occur against healthcare providers- nurses I believe have it the worst. I think the average for ED providers is over 1 assault per year. Last winter I had to get stitches from a plastic surgeon because a patient came up behind and bashed my head into a tiled wall. That was great.

Rather recently at the psych hospital I work at, I was going between buildings and saw two security guards        dealing with an absolutely irate man. One of the guards gave me a look of “help me”. Then I hear the the man say to the guards “the first person to lay a hand on me will have it cut off”. I come over and deescalate the situation. Apparently his friends dropped him off in the driveway of the hospital and abandoned him and he was in full blown mental health crisis.

I brought him into the admissions building, got him settled with the intake people- he had calmed down and was extremely polite to staff, willing to be admitted, and so I went back to my office. 15-20min later I get a phone call saying that when they searched his body as part of the intake process, they found a hunting knife w/5” blade and loaded .45cal pistol with an extra (loaded) magazine.  He handed them over voluntarily without complaint but didn’t seem to realize the gravity of the situation.

It’s absolutely terrifying to consider just how differently this interaction could have ended for everyone involved (and beyond) had things not worked out as they did. The guy was delusional, paranoid, extremely agitated, and clearly terrified and confused- not a good combination with a gun. Thank god for a moment of clarity on his part to be compliant.

I don’t know the full details but response by the local police was apparently left much to be desired with a “what do you want us to do” attitude. They refused to take possession of the gun because the guy had come to the hospital and was admitted voluntarily. I suppose that’s the law but it’s a bit crazy to me. And they had to be persuaded to at least dispose of the bullets (even with the patient’s permission).

Several years ago we had shooting in Boston at one of the hospitals under the same ownership as mine. A man walked into the building, demanded to speak to a specific cardiologist, the doctor kindly stopped his day to spend 40 minutes talking to the man about his mother’s treatment (who had died as a result of her complex condition)- before being shot dead and the perpetrator killing himself. I know a number of people who worked with the cardiologist and by all accounts he was a truly outstanding and brilliant physician and truly went above and beyond for his patients. He had 3 young kids and a pregnant wife. 

Safety for hospital workers is something really not talked about enough. I think my hospital does a pretty good job at trying to prevent and handling such incidents. But I’ve heard many horror stories from friends where the admins just try to sweep everything under the rug.


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1531701824201293824/



https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1532236367727677441/


----------



## SuperMatt

Governor Abbott is talking out of both sides of his mouth:


> On Wednesday, Abbott asked state lawmakers to convene a pair of “special legislative committees” to address the issues of school safety and mass violence. During remarks last week to the National Rifle Association, the governor ruled out new gun restrictions in response to the massacre.



He already told the NRA convention he won’t impose any gun restrictions. So even before these special committees get started, we know they are nothing more than a show. He told everybody he isn’t going to do anything. People need to stop voting for such politicians.


----------



## Joe

I don’t know how true it is but I saw on Tik Tok some parents will have an open casket funeral to show the world the damage. Like Emmitt Till in the 1950s.


----------



## fooferdoggie

GOP Lawmaker Manages To Blame Abortion For Mass Shootings​








						GOP Lawmaker Manages To Blame Abortion For Mass Shootings
					

"Life has no value to a lot of these folks," Rep. Billy Long of Missouri said.




					www.huffpost.com


----------



## Roller

fooferdoggie said:


> GOP Lawmaker Manages To Blame Abortion For Mass Shootings​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> GOP Lawmaker Manages To Blame Abortion For Mass Shootings
> 
> 
> "Life has no value to a lot of these folks," Rep. Billy Long of Missouri said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com



Wonder what this idiot would say if he were asked if he supports programs to assist families with babies after they're born, especially if they're not white. He'd probably cut the interview short like Ted Cruz did to the British reporter the other day. But I think these despicable lowlifes should be pushed much harder when they spew their BS.


----------



## SuperMatt

We learned that the killer in Tulsa bought the gun in a fit of anger and within an *hour* of buying the semi-automatic rifle was at the hospital shooting his doctor.



			https://wapo.st/3ze4PxX
		

(paywall removed)



> Then, at 2 p.m. on Wednesday, Louis bought a .223 caliber semi-automatic rifle and went to the hospital, also armed with a .40-caliber pistol he bought from a pawnshop on Sunday. Both weapons were purchased legally, Franklin said. Authorities recovered 37 bullet casings from the scene.




Republicans oppose even a waiting period to buy a gun. This blood is all over their hands. If you vote for them, consider yourself an accomplice as well.

Once again… BOTH GUNS WERE PURCHASED LEGALLY. Shame on every single person protecting unlimited access to assault weapons.


----------



## Eric

Can someone please explain to us how this MF still has a job? He's directly responsible for several of these murders.

CNN reporter threatened with trespassing after grilling Uvalde police chief over his actions during shooting​








						CNN reporter threatened with trespassing after grilling Uvalde police chief
					

Shimon Prokupecz had earlier been grilling police chief Pedro Arredondo about his actions during the Uvalde shooting




					www.independent.co.uk


----------



## SuperMatt

The President is on TV right now calling for an assault weapons ban. He pointed out that more American kids are killed by guns than American soldiers dying in battle. That is seriously messed up.

It is time to stop sacrificing children to the gun fetishists. Thank you President Biden.

I agree with all the measures he is putting forward. One area I wish he’d go farther? He reached out to “responsible” gun owners in a conciliatory way, but I think assault weapon sales should not just be banned. There should be a mandatory buyback of all currently owned assault weapons too. But if we take ANY action that could stop shootings, it’s better than nothing.


----------



## Eric

SuperMatt said:


> The President is on TV right now calling for an assault weapons ban. He pointed out that more American kids are killed by guns than American soldiers dying in battle. That is seriously messed up.
> 
> It is time to stop sacrificing children to the gun fetishists. Thank you President Biden.
> 
> I agree with all the measures he is putting forward. One area I wish he’d go farther? He reached out to “responsible” gun owners in a conciliatory way, but I think assault weapon sales should not just be banned. There should be a mandatory buyback of all currently owned assault weapons too. But if we take ANY action that could stop shootings, it’s better than nothing.



IMO it was the best speech he's given since taking office. He nailed it on every single point, Republicans will not budge on anything reasonable but hopefully the people will take notice. WTG Biden for giving those victims a voice.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy




----------



## GermanSuplex

Chew Toy McCoy said:


>




I saw this earlier. The reaction is great. What is Goober ranting about as far as 1960 Supreme Court decisions? Sounds like redneck racism to me, but maybe there was a gun decision I’m unaware of.


----------



## JayMysteri0




----------



## Roller

GermanSuplex said:


> I saw this earlier. The reaction is great. What is Goober ranting about as far as 1960 Supreme Court decisions? Sounds like redneck racism to me, but maybe there was a gun decision I’m unaware of.



Gohmert, Gosar, Greene, all elected by constituents who can't even recognize when they're being grifted.


----------



## JayMysteri0

LFG

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1532665943033356289/



> A speech pathology clerk who hid during the May 24, 2022 massacre at Robb Elementary has started court proceedings against gunmaker Daniel Defense.
> 
> It is the first reported legal action taken as a result of the mass shooting, which killed 21 children and two adults. While not a full-blown lawsuit, the filing seeks to determine if the gun manufacturer can be sued for how it promotes firearms.
> 
> "They're marketing to people who it's not reasonable should have guns ... and we think that may be young people," said attorney Don Flanary.
> 
> The gunman was 18 and legally purchased the weapons and ammunition used in the killing.
> 
> In court documents filed Thursday in the 38th Judicial District, the clerk, Emilia "Amy" Marin, 56, petitioned the court to force the company to sit for a deposition, as well as to produce materials related to its website, profits, lobbying, sales and marketing of AR-15-style rifles like the one used at the shooting.
> 
> In Texas, parties can begin collecting evidence before bringing a lawsuit under Rule 202. The filing, called a pre-suit deposition, can be used to compel testimony that will be used in an anticipated lawsuit, or to investigate a potential claim or suit.
> 
> Marin's petition also requests information regarding the four Daniel Defense AR-15-style rifles found in the hotel room of the 2017 Las Vegas shooter. Her attorney says they want to examine whether the gun manufacturer did anything differently around its marketing after its guns were used for that crime.
> 
> Daniel Defense, based in Georgia, manufactured one of the two AR-15 style assault rifles purchased by 18-year-old Salvador Ramos before he attacked the Uvalde school.
> 
> Ramos shared a screenshot of the receipt for the gun, which he had bought online, to people he was friends with on Instagram, according to the Daily Dot.
> 
> The gunmaker has not yet responded to a request for comment on the filing. It's website acknowledges the tragedy and says it will cooperate with federal, state and local investigators regarding the shooting. "We will keep the families of the victims and the entire Uvalde community in our thoughts and our prayers," the statement says.




Interesting note:



> Marin, though not by name, was said to have propped open a back door, allowing the shooter to enter the school. The Texas Department of Public Safety walked back that information after Flanary, the attorney, shared her version of what happened with the San Antonio Express-News. Video footage from the school showed Marin closing the door shut behind her, according to DPS.
> 
> While being falsely blamed was painful, Flanary said Marin ultimately seeks justice from those who encouraged the attack, not those who responded to it.
> 
> "Going after the police officers who made a mistake isn't going to prevent it from happening at other places," he says. "She feels like if if we go this direction, we can make a change."
> 
> Through her attorney, Marin declined to talk directly about her experience or the suit. Flanary says she has been receiving medical treatment for her psychological trauma.


----------



## SuperMatt

JayMysteri0 said:


> LFG
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1532665943033356289/
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting note:



I didn’t hear about the lawsuit until now, but I knew the woman was the target of harassment after the police accused her of leaving the door open. I wonder why she is not going to sue the police? I’d think, at the very least, the official who publicly blamed her for leaving the door open would be liable.

If they didn’t have a school police department, perhaps “real” police would have ended this much sooner. Of course, if people couldn’t buy military weapons, the entire tragedy could have been averted or at least it would have been far less deadly.


----------



## JayMysteri0

SuperMatt said:


> I didn’t hear about the lawsuit until now, but I knew the woman was the target of harassment after the police accused her of leaving the door open. I wonder why she is not going to sue the police? I’d think, at the very least, the official who publicly blamed her for leaving the door open would be liable.
> 
> If they didn’t have a school police department, perhaps “real” police would have ended this much sooner. Of course, if people couldn’t buy military weapons, the entire tragedy could have been averted or at least it would have been far less deadly.



My feeling is that going after the police would be for her personally.

Going after Daniel Defense is for everyone involved in the shooting.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

GermanSuplex said:


> I saw this earlier. The reaction is great. What is Goober ranting about as far as 1960 Supreme Court decisions? Sounds like redneck racism to me, but maybe there was a gun decision I’m unaware of.




And it’s good to see somebody mention the fact that there is more violence in cities because there are a lot more people in a concentrated area, but we’re talking about trying to reason with people who think guns aren’t a factor in shooting and having more guns is somehow going to reduce shootings.


----------



## DT

SuperMatt said:


> We learned that the killer in Tulsa bought the gun in a fit of anger and within an *hour* of buying the semi-automatic rifle was at the hospital shooting his doctor.
> 
> Republicans oppose even a waiting period to buy a gun. This blood is all over their hands. If you vote for them, consider yourself an accomplice as well.
> 
> Once again… BOTH GUNS WERE PURCHASED LEGALLY. Shame on every single person protecting unlimited access to assault weapons.




Yeah, I've read some blathering posts about the Tesla hospital shooter, assuming a certain profile, and they were almost completely wrong, it appears he's a 45 year old Black man, married to doctor (MD) with a teenage daughter, not a "gun nut".

My point being:  regardless of the demographics of the shooter, black/white/male/female/wealthy/poor/old/young, the failure is in the system that allows exceptionally lethal firearms to be purchased on a whim, without the proper vetting, without certification, you know, the things that have to be in place for a f***ing fishing license.


----------



## SuperMatt

DT said:


> Yeah, I've read some blathering posts about the Tesla hospital shooter, assuming a certain profile, and they were almost completely wrong, it appears he's a 45 year old Black man, married to doctor (MD) with a teenage daughter, not a "gun nut".
> 
> My point being:  regardless of the demographics of the shooter, black/white/male/female/wealthy/poor/old/young, the failure is in the system that allows exceptionally lethal firearms to be purchased on a whim, without the proper vetting, without certification, you know, the things that have to be in place for a f***ing fishing license.



Owning weapons of mass destruction is a right! Fishing is a privilege!


----------



## DT

Seriously, a few Keys trips ago, we went for mini lobster season, got our licenses, proper measuring tools, etc., we were with our friends, so that makes 4 adults and 2 young teenage kids, clearly families (not poachers), being very laid back, no open containers - we got approached, boarded, our catch checked for size, verification of the correct number of licenses (if you're in the boat with a catch, you need one).

Don't get me wrong, the FWC guys were friendly, and just "doing the job", but I bet we had more requirements up front, more scrutiny by law enforcement than any process involving firearms.


----------



## JayMysteri0

Once again, summing up my past points beautifully for me






"_That's how evil Critical Race Theory is.  It's only been around for like a year, and it's already caused 3 decades of school shootings._"

Invest in the classrooms.  But NOT for the teachers, supplies, desks, or anything.  For ballistic blankets!  Does anyone want to go to a school that has "pretty decorative" ballistic blankets?  How much of a f'n dystopia are these nutbags begging for?


----------



## JayMysteri0

Those F'N guns


----------



## Yoused

12-year-old lad robs gas station. After discussing which was the least secure location with a classmate in school, went home, changed clothes, fetched a 9mm pistol and 2 magazines *from his parents' gun safe* and walked a mile to the place. When te clerk responded to his demand for money with "_Are you serious_?" the lad put a round in the ceiling.

That has to be like the safest gun safe ever.


----------



## Yoused

JayMysteri0 said:


> "_That's how evil Critical Race Theory is. It's only been around for like a year, and it's already caused 3 decades of school shootings._"



In the past couple of decades, the Cathode Ray Tube has been replaced by Liquid Crystal Displays, which may be worrisome for trendspotters if it suggests that Critical Race Theory will be giving way to the Lowest Common Denominator.


----------



## SuperMatt

Yoused said:


> 12-year-old lad robs gas station. After discussing which was the least secure location with a classmate in school, went home, changed clothes, fetched a 9mm pistol and 2 magazines *from his parents' gun safe* and walked a mile to the place. When te clerk responded to his demand for money with "_Are you serious_?" the lad put a round in the ceiling.
> 
> That has to be like the safest gun safe ever.



If kids can find dad’s Playboy stash, they can figure out how to get into the gun safe. It’s best just not to have the guns at all. Statistics show homes with a gun in them are LESS safe than those without. Your guns don’t keep you safe - they do the exact opposite.


----------



## Roller

Worth watching:

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1532486259775619073/


----------



## Roller

There is no bottom for these people:









						‘Congratulations to George Floyd on 2 years of sobriety,’ Alabama gun store sign read
					

The store is owned by Dr. Roger Nichols, a Cherokee County commissioner and veterinarian.




					www.al.com


----------



## JayMysteri0

The teacher's suit against daniel defense won't be the only one.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1532881032298512384/


----------



## fooferdoggie

JayMysteri0 said:


> The teacher's suit against daniel defense won't be the only one.
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1532881032298512384/



that company is going to regret the baby and ar 15 pics .


----------



## Citysnaps

Had an interesting conversation on FB yesterday with friends on what's needed to get beyond where we are today on mass shootings. My friend Pete, a very experienced  ex  SFPD cop and fellow photographer proposed this a few years ago - thought I'd pass it on here: 

1. Ban Assault Weapons.

2. If you already have a banned weapon you MAY keep the weapon if you register it, but you can NEVER resell the weapon. Your hiers can NOT inherit the weapon. The weapon must be turned into law enforcement upon the owners death with a $1,000 payment to the heirs no questions asked.

3. You must posses a certificate of compliance when going to a range to shoot an assault weapon.

4. Bump stocks a felony. 

5. No private party sales. All sales through a FFL dealer. 

6. Mandatory background checks and waiting periods on all firearms 

7. Persons on terrorist watch list or no fly list prohibited. 

8. License to purchase required with mandatory gun safety course required. 

9. 5150 detention, or history of same, automatic seizure of weapons with hearing required for return. 

10. Must be 21 years of age to purchase or possess. 

11. Ban high capacity magazines ( 9 for handguns, 5 for rifles/shotguns).  

12. No ghost/non serial number guns. 

In a couple of generations the assault weapons will be gone.


----------



## Roller

citypix said:


> Had an interesting conversation on FB yesterday with friends on what's needed to get beyond where we are today on mass shootings. My friend Pete, a very experienced  ex  SFPD cop and fellow photographer proposed this a few years ago - thought I'd pass it on here:
> 
> 1. Ban Assault Weapons.
> 
> 2. If you already have a banned weapon you MAY keep the weapon if you register it, but you can NEVER resell the weapon. Your hiers can NOT inherit the weapon. The weapon must be turned into law enforcement upon the owners death with a $1,000 payment to the heirs no questions asked.
> 
> 3. You must posses a certificate of compliance when going to a range to shoot an assault weapon.
> 
> 4. Bump stocks a felony.
> 
> 5. No private party sales. All sales through a FFL dealer.
> 
> 6. Mandatory background checks and waiting periods on all firearms
> 
> 7. Persons on terrorist watch list or no fly list prohibited.
> 
> 8. License to purchase required with mandatory gun safety course required.
> 
> 9. 5150 detention, or history of same, automatic seizure of weapons with hearing required for return.
> 
> 10. Must be 21 years of age to purchase or possess.
> 
> 11. Ban high capacity magazines ( 9 for handguns, 5 for rifles/shotguns).
> 
> 12. No ghost/non serial number guns.
> 
> *In a couple of generations the assault weapons will be gone.*



Not that I disagree with these measures, but in a couple of generations the planet will be borderline habitable at the current minimal rate of progress on climate change.


----------



## SuperMatt

citypix said:


> Had an interesting conversation on FB yesterday with friends on what's needed to get beyond where we are today on mass shootings. My friend Pete, a very experienced  ex  SFPD cop and fellow photographer proposed this a few years ago - thought I'd pass it on here:
> 
> 1. Ban Assault Weapons.
> 
> 2. If you already have a banned weapon you MAY keep the weapon if you register it, but you can NEVER resell the weapon. Your hiers can NOT inherit the weapon. The weapon must be turned into law enforcement upon the owners death with a $1,000 payment to the heirs no questions asked.
> 
> 3. You must posses a certificate of compliance when going to a range to shoot an assault weapon.
> 
> 4. Bump stocks a felony.
> 
> 5. No private party sales. All sales through a FFL dealer.
> 
> 6. Mandatory background checks and waiting periods on all firearms
> 
> 7. Persons on terrorist watch list or no fly list prohibited.
> 
> 8. License to purchase required with mandatory gun safety course required.
> 
> 9. 5150 detention, or history of same, automatic seizure of weapons with hearing required for return.
> 
> 10. Must be 21 years of age to purchase or possess.
> 
> 11. Ban high capacity magazines ( 9 for handguns, 5 for rifles/shotguns).
> 
> 12. No ghost/non serial number guns.
> 
> In a couple of generations the assault weapons will be gone.



Glad to see there is consensus on so many of these reforms. Biden called for almost all of these during his speech this week.

Sadly, I feel there is no hope of Republicans adopting even one of them though.

Remember when Mitch McConnell assigned Tim Scott to address police violence in 2020, and he pretended to work on it, then decided to do nothing after a year? It will be the same with Sen. Cornyn and the gun control measures.

Have somebody ”work on it” for a while but then come up with nothing and blame the liberals. They just want to look like they care until enough time passes for emotions to calm down. Then they will walk away. You’ll see.


----------



## Yoused

here is some weirdness about the Buffalo shooting


----------



## JayMysteri0

Da Fuk?!!

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1533095303926120449/

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1533125765788745728/

What the what the fuck?!



> 12-year-old boy in custody after holding up gas station, firing off warning shot inside
> 
> 
> Hartford Police said the boy went to school, went home, and then retrieved the gun from a parent's gun safe before walking to the gas station.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.wzzm13.com



_HARTFORD, Mich. — A 12-year-old boy is in custody after law enforcement said he robbed a gas station of cash and fired off a shot inside Wednesday afternoon in Hartford. 

Just before 4 p.m. on Wednesday, 911 dispatchers got a call about an armed robbery at the Marathon gas station at 108 East Main Street, which is just a block from the police station. 

Dispatchers learned a shot had been fired inside by a young boy, who ran off after getting a bag of cash.
Hartford Police Chief Tressa Beltran was returning from a detail and was able to make it to the gas station within 90 seconds of getting that 911 call. 

Other officers made it there shortly after. 

Chief Beltran spotted the suspect behind some buildings downtown about a block and a half away from the scene of the armed robbery. She took him into custody without incident. _



_Hartford Lt. Mike Prince says the 12-year-old boy went to school Wednesday and had apparently talked with a classmate about the least secure gas station in town. 

The boy went home, changed clothes, got into a parent's gun safe and retrieved a 9mm handgun with two loaded magazines. 
He put the gun in a backpack and then walked about a mile to the gas station, Lt. Prince said. 

The 12-year-old waited in line behind a customer at the gas station when he pulled out the gun and told the clerk to put money in the back. 

She said, "are you serious?" 

That's when the boy fired a shot into the ceiling. She reached down and gave him a bank deposit bag, telling him to leave the store. 
Lt. Prince said the spent shell casing hit one of the clerks. 

"She was afraid she wasn't going to see her kids anymore," Lt. Prince said about the clerk. 

"Every day I'm seeing something new at this job. I've been a full-time police officer for 38 years. What really flabbergasted me is that he showed no emotion," Lt. Prince said. _

The kicker?

_"He told us he didn't do it for the money. He said he would've thrown the money into the sewer. He wouldn't give us an explanation why he did it." 

Because Van Buren County doesn't have a juvenile lockup, he was taken to Allegan county to be detained ahead of a hearing. 

The boy is at a hearing in juvenile court Thursday. _

Yes the kid has issues.  He also seemingly had EASY ACCESS TO A GUN!!


----------



## Yoused

I posted that same exact link back in #673, sans the video clips.


----------



## Citysnaps

Dr. Ted Nugent has weighed in on the matter with some statistics:

_"There are 30,000 gun related deaths per year by firearms, and this number is not disputed. U.S. population 324,059,091 as of Wednesday, 2016. *Do the math: *0.000000925% of the population dies from gun related actions each year. Statistically speaking, this is insignificant!"_









						Gun Control Statistics from Ted Nugent
					

There are 30,000 gun related deaths per year by firearms, and this number is not disputed. U.S. population 324,059,091 as of Wednesday, 2016. Do the math: 0.000000925% of the population dies from gun related actions each year. Statistically speaking, this is insignificant! What is never told...




					sportingshooter.com.au


----------



## Yoused

When I need advice on how to spend a week filling my pants with my own crap, Terrible Ted will be the person I turn to. On any other matter, I will consult a competent person.


----------



## JayMysteri0

Can't lie, I've been digging the memes from people making the case for gun control.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1533403836525731840/
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1533405393099051008/

What is being referred to though, is a shooting in Philadelphia where 14 people were shot.  3 died.



> Girard College Advisor Among 3 Killed, in South Street Mass Shooting
> 
> 
> At least 14 people were shot, three of them killed, when gunmen opened fire into a crowd on South Street in Philadelphia late Saturday night.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nbcphiladelphia.com




I used to hang out there quite a bit, and after leaving school we moved just down from there because we loved the area so much.

My biggest fear since the pressure on gun fans & manufacturers is ever increasing is the inevitable reach for that tired worn out crutch of  crime / "hellhole" bits, like a congressman tried earlier.  Like a failed president tried, talked about, but NEVER actually truly addressed. Because to address that would take off the table that point to use again & again.  A point that some parrots are trying to make work online, because the shooting happened in Philly.  Also there's crime in Chicago ( who gets their guns from out of state, but as usual let's ignore that factoid ), so it must be places run by democrats.  Also notice in those areas, mental health is brought up.  It's like it's excuse for certain shooters over others.     It's like 'mental health' is a problem that only occurs at specific times temporarily, then suddenly it goes away when not needed so it doesn't need to be funded.  Suddenly it's 'crime' problem, which always needs more & more funding.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1533429176195325954/

All the while completely ignoring where the last mass school shooting JUST HAPPENED, and who is in charge there and making it easier for shooters to get guns.

Guns aren't the problem though.   Which we could solve by moving ALL the people out cities & just left all the guns lying around.  Sadly though statistics show if only guns lived in the city, overcrowding would still be a problem.


----------



## DT

JFC, the news this morning was covering that shooting in Philly, and when they cut to commercial, I shit you not, it was for the local gun store (Shooters).


----------



## GermanSuplex

As briefly mentioned earlier, the news cycle is further glorifying this, which is hard not to do because they’re horrific events and they have to be covered. I think social media is worse than the news, because these deranged individuals are more likely to find connections and communities online that foster and reinforce their sinister thoughts.

Five months until the midterms, I don’t even want to try to guess what horrible events will take place between now and then.


----------



## Edd

Has this been posted yet?









						DeSantis pulls Rays funding after gun control tweets, donation
					

Florida governor retaliated against Tampa team for 'activism'




					deadspin.com
				




DeSantis is wild, man.  Every bit as bold as Trump, unafraid of being/appearing corrupt.  He's a monster.


----------



## fooferdoggie

Edd said:


> Has this been posted yet?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DeSantis pulls Rays funding after gun control tweets, donation
> 
> 
> Florida governor retaliated against Tampa team for 'activism'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> deadspin.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DeSantis is wild, man.  Every bit as bold as Trump, unafraid of being/appearing corrupt.  He's a monster.



so many now the turtle is their leader I that.


----------



## JayMysteri0

Edd said:


> Has this been posted yet?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DeSantis pulls Rays funding after gun control tweets, donation
> 
> 
> Florida governor retaliated against Tampa team for 'activism'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> deadspin.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DeSantis is wild, man.  Every bit as bold as Trump, unafraid of being/appearing corrupt.  He's a monster.



I hadn't seen that story posted or the one where he supposedly went after the Special Olympics.



> Special Olympics pulls vax requirement after DeSantis threatens $27.5M fine
> 
> 
> The Special Olympics will no longer require its athletes be vaccinated against COVID-19 after Florida threatened the games’ governing body with fines.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com




Sometimes you wonder needlessly if the man can sink any lower, and he smiles while he slithers lower.

Back on topic though
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1533441069374898178/


----------



## Joe

Our country is doomed. We will fall from within.


----------



## fooferdoggie

so funny to see people who think the 2nd amendment is them out important thing dont even know what it says. And arm our children with flashlights to protect them from gunmen. 









						Samantha Bee - For people who are obsessed with the Second... | By Samantha Bee | For people who are obsessed with the Second Amendment, NRA fanboys sure don't know anything about it!
					

196K views, 1.7K likes, 53 loves, 580 comments, 652 shares, Facebook Watch Videos from Samantha Bee: For people who are obsessed with the Second Amendment, NRA fanboys sure don't know anything about it!




					fb.watch


----------



## JayMysteri0

Something to consider & share when desperation leads the usual suspects to bring up Chicago in the gun debates

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1533468073721679872/

The reminder of the fact that the gun fetishists always forget in their Chicago claims
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1533477393662345216/

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1533477075780354050/


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

DT said:


> JFC, the news this morning was covering that shooting in Philly, and when they cut to commercial, I shit you not, it was for the local gun store (Shooters).




Probably because I live in Silicon Valley, I don’t think I’ve ever seen a commercial or sign advertising guns or a gun store.  It seems we’re more about consumerism or bettering ourselves than medicating our issues with firearms.   Not saying we don’t have gun stores or shootings.  We just don’t feel the need to advertise it.


----------



## DT

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> Probably because I live in Silicon Valley, I don’t think I’ve ever seen a commercial or sign advertising guns or a gun store.  It seems we’re more about consumerism or bettering ourselves than medicating our issues with firearms.   Not saying we don’t have gun stores or shootings.  We just don’t feel the need to advertise it.




Fortunately, we very rarely watch any broadcast TV, so we don't see much in the way of local ads.

That one, ugh, it's exactly what you would expect, but the really terrible part is at the end, they're hitting their list of things you can get, like, "Your source for ammo ..." and after each item there's a gunshot sound effect.


----------



## Eric

What if Republicans put the same effort into saving children from being slaughtered by assault weapons in schools as as they do when they were embryos?


“I’m now interested in protecting children…” from
      clevercomebacks


----------



## DT

What Do Cops Do?​A unified theory of police behavior​Alex Pareene
Jun 3









						What Do Cops Do?
					

A unified theory of police behavior




					theap.substack.com
				




Posting this in the context of the Uvalde clusterfuck, but it's a generally good take on police behavior.


----------



## Huntn

DT said:


> What Do Cops Do?​A unified theory of police behavior​Alex Pareene
> Jun 3
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What Do Cops Do?
> 
> 
> A unified theory of police behavior
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theap.substack.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Posting this in the context of the Uvalde clusterfuck, but it's a generally good take on police behavior.



What struck me about Uvalde is the report/story police in tactical gear stood outside the school while shots were being fired because their Chief told them to wait for backup as if it was a barricade situation, while parents urgently demanded they go save their children.

The thing about barricaded suspects is that if they are isolated, sure pen them in and wait for backup. But the parents listening to shootings know, and the police should be able to understand who is at risk and being shot, students and teachers.

I can’t say how brave I’d be in such a situation, but it’s hard to believe that  hired to protect against such a thing could stand outside, listen, and do nothing.


----------



## Citysnaps

"Hardening schools" is the latest reflexive talking point for those demanding that no-limitations gun ownership never change.

Gun violence is not limited to schools, though. We would also need to "harden" churches, synagogues, workplaces, movie theaters, big box stores, shopping malls, music venues, car shows, grocery stores, nightclubs, colleges/universities, subway cars, spring break parties, and more, where mass shootings have occurred.

Sadly, we're now at a point where slaughtered children and adults are viewed by many gun owners as mere consequences of no-limitations gun ownership.


----------



## SuperMatt

citypix said:


> "Hardening schools" is the latest reflexive talking point for those demanding that no-limitations gun ownership never change.
> 
> Gun violence is not limited to schools, though. We would also need to "harden" churches, synagogues, workplaces, movie theaters, big box stores, shopping malls, music venues, car shows, grocery stores, nightclubs, colleges/universities, subway cars, spring break parties, and more, where mass shootings have occurred.
> 
> Sadly, we're now at a point where slaughtered children and adults are viewed by many gun owners as mere consequences of no-limitations gun ownership.



I don’t understand why so many gun owners value their hobby above the safety of children from violent deaths. But it’s a shrinking minority. Sadly, our government gives outsized powers to a minority (i.e. the Senate and the Electoral College), and that minority is beholden to the NRA.


----------



## Citysnaps

SuperMatt said:


> I don’t understand why so many gun owners value their hobby above the safety of children from violent deaths.




I guess as long as it's _other peoples children _they're OK with the consequences of no-limitations gun ownership.


----------



## Herdfan

Well here is something that makes me happy, but probaby will make most of you here nervous....




> A recent survey conducted by professors at Harvard and Northeastern Universities found the number of female first-time gun buyers has doubled over the past two years, to 3.5 million.
> 
> But it appears women aren’t the only group buying more guns.
> 
> *A separate survey by the National Shooting Sports Foundation found gun sales went up 56% for Black Americans in 2020. *Philip Smith, the President and founder of the National African American Gun Association - or NAGA – said more people in the Black community are starting to come around on lawful gun ownership.
> 
> “African Americans for too long have went around in society being soft targets.”




Black gun ownership is increasing and that is a great thing.  But I wonder if all these Black American gun owners are going to be happy with the Dems wanting to limit their newly discovered 2A rights?

A different article also found Hispanic gun ownership increasing as well, but the Dems are losing them for other reasons.









						Gun sales surge among women, certain minority groups
					

Guns are flying off the shelves. It’s been that way since the start of the pandemic. But sales aren’t slowing down, and there’s been a surge in sales, among certain groups.




					www.wtoc.com


----------



## SuperMatt

Herdfan said:


> Well here is something that makes me happy, but probaby will make most of you here nervous....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Black gun ownership is increasing and that is a great thing.  But I wonder if all these Black American gun owners are going to be happy with the Dems wanting to limit their newly discovered 2A rights?
> 
> A different article also found Hispanic gun ownership increasing as well, but the Dems are losing them for other reasons.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gun sales surge among women, certain minority groups
> 
> 
> Guns are flying off the shelves. It’s been that way since the start of the pandemic. But sales aren’t slowing down, and there’s been a surge in sales, among certain groups.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.wtoc.com



Increased guns have led to increased gun violence. So no, I’m not nervous. I’m disappointed. The failure to properly regulate guns has led to this deadly cycle:

1. Gun violence increases, and a high-profile mass shooting makes people afraid.
2. Congress fails to act to protect people
3. In the absence of government action, people buy more guns as a response to the fear from #1.

Not even a month past the brutal mass murder of little kids, and there are calls to celebrate increased gun purchases?

Also: gun purchases overall, according to your link, were up 60%. So the increase among black people is slightly behind the overall rate. Pretty important context to include, don’t you think?

And your assertion that black people just now “discovered” the 2nd amendment?  

Finally, most gun owners are not crazy. They mostly support stronger background checks, bans of AR-15s, high capacity magazines, higher age limits, etc. I don’t know why you think people that buy guns suddenly are going to become 2nd amendment extremists.


----------



## JayMysteri0

Herdfan said:


> Well here is something that makes me happy, but probaby will make most of you here nervous....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Black gun ownership is increasing and that is a great thing.  But I wonder if all these Black American gun owners are going to be happy with the Dems wanting to limit their newly discovered 2A rights?
> 
> A different article also found Hispanic gun ownership increasing as well, but the Dems are losing them for other reasons.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gun sales surge among women, certain minority groups
> 
> 
> Guns are flying off the shelves. It’s been that way since the start of the pandemic. But sales aren’t slowing down, and there’s been a surge in sales, among certain groups.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.wtoc.com



Let's be fair.  That is inevitable.  It's been made clear that the nra & gun lobby / manufacturers have pretty much put their focus on marketing on fear.  So if things get worse with guns, it drives the sale of guns based on the fantasy a gun will protect you from a gun.  It's cyclical and intentional.  It's also not a real thing.



> The 'Good Guys With Guns' Keep Failing to Stop Mass Shootings
> 
> 
> In the 10 years since Sandy Hook, "good guys with guns" have been present or nearby at nearly every major mass shooting.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> time.com




The fact that more people are buying guns should be disappointing, for one reason... It's based on fear.



> “African Americans for too long have went around in society being soft targets.”




That's a good thing?  Certainly runs counter to Fled Cruz's claim about the U.S. being a safe country.  Seems more like an admission of the sad reality of this country.


----------



## SuperMatt

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1532711083487657989/

Yup.


----------



## Herdfan

SuperMatt said:


> Not even a month past the brutal mass murder of little kids, and there are calls to celebrate increased gun purchases?




Sales don't increase because of shootings.  Sales increase because in the immediate aftermath, the Dems start clamoring for more gun control.  Vicious cycle.

Ironically, the gun control crowd needs these shootings (note I said needs, not wants) to get people motivated.  No mass shootings, no one listens.


----------



## mollyc

Herdfan said:


> Sales don't increase because of shootings.  Sales increase because in the immediate aftermath, the Dems start clamoring for more gun control.  Vicious cycle.
> 
> Ironically, the gun control crowd needs these shootings (note I said needs, not wants) to get people motivated.  No mass shootings, no one listens.



I mean, I'm not anti-gun, but if there weren't mass shootings, we likely wouldn't need control.....


----------



## SuperMatt

Herdfan said:


> Sales don't increase because of shootings.  Sales increase because in the immediate aftermath, the Dems start clamoring for more gun control.  Vicious cycle.
> 
> Ironically, the gun control crowd needs these shootings (note I said needs, not wants) to get people motivated.  No mass shootings, no one listens.



The evidence points to the exact opposite. The article you just posted said it was motivated by fear of violence, not because of worries that guns needed to be purchased to avoid a ban.

And your second sentence is easily proven wrong. Gun control was much stricter in the past. In 1994, the assault weapons ban was *not* due to school shootings, and it passed the senate 95-4. Since the school shootings started, gun control has only gotten weaker.

I would expect a gun rights advocate to have at least this basic level of knowledge. Or I suppose the strategy is to spout lies and hope people are stupid enough to believe them. Worked for Trump.

Evidence shows clearly: more guns = more shootings. And now guns are the #1 killer of children in America. You can try to excuse it away but you can’t change those basic facts.

There is no attempt at honesty from the gun rights advocates. Simply a litany of excuses to make them feel better about valuing guns more than children.


----------



## Herdfan

SuperMatt said:


> The evidence points to the exact opposite. The article you just posted said it was motivated by fear of violence, not because of worries that guns needed to be purchased to avoid a ban.




Two different things at play here.

Yes, some people, especially new gun owners, are buying them because of a fear of violence.

But for someone like me and others like me, when the politicians start talking about banning something, we go buy it before it's banned.  So both can be true.  I have plenty of guns to protect myself, so that is not my motivation for buying new ones.  Sometimes it is because it could get banned, other times is just because I want one and need to get it before the price goes up some more.


----------



## JayMysteri0

Herdfan said:


> But for someone like me and others like me, when the politicians start talking about banning something, we go buy it before it's banned.  So both can be true.  I have plenty of guns to protect myself, so that is not my motivation for buying new ones.  Sometimes it is because it could get banned, other times is just because I want one and need to get it before the price goes up some more.



So, of those guns you brought out of fear of them possibly being banned, how many were actually banned?

Historically how many such guns have actually ever been banned?

I wasn't aware of several federal bans on semi automatic, military style .50 cal rifles, handguns or even large capacity magazines.  We did have prohibitions but they expired in 2004.

Because it again is a purchase based on a fear.  Even if it hasn't ever been a justified fear.


----------



## fooferdoggie

Herdfan said:


> Sales don't increase because of shootings.  Sales increase because in the immediate aftermath, the Dems start clamoring for more gun control.  Vicious cycle.
> 
> Ironically, the gun control crowd needs these shootings (note I said needs, not wants) to get people motivated.  No mass shootings, no one listens.



Well your saying they are stupid enough to think that will happen? If so then maybe they should not be allowed to buy guns.


----------



## Huntn

Herdfan said:


> Well here is something that makes me happy, but probaby will make most of you here nervous....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Black gun ownership is increasing and that is a great thing.  But I wonder if all these Black American gun owners are going to be happy with the Dems wanting to limit their newly discovered 2A rights?
> 
> A different article also found Hispanic gun ownership increasing as well, but the Dems are losing them for other reasons.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gun sales surge among women, certain minority groups
> 
> 
> Guns are flying off the shelves. It’s been that way since the start of the pandemic. But sales aren’t slowing down, and there’s been a surge in sales, among certain groups.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.wtoc.com



When you think your country maybe going down the shitter, for whatever reason or rationalization, it feels natural to arm ones self.. And in doing so, we become less civilized because assholes who have no business owning guns, get them and go on killing sprees as their good bye to a dissatisfied life.


----------



## SuperMatt

Huntn said:


> When you think your country maybe going down the shitter, for whatever reason or rationalization, it feels natural to arm ones self.. And in doing so, we become less civilized because assholes who have no business owning guns, get them and go on killing sprees as their good by to a dissatisfied life.




Imagine if the USA and USSR kept increasing nuclear arsenals instead of having treaties to reduce the number. That’s how insane the idea of “more guns will keep us safer” is.

The most vehement defenders of unlimited gun rights are hobbyists. They don’t want their hobby infringed upon even if it could save innocent children from being brutally murdered. It’s the epitome of the GOP “F U, I got mine” mentality.

A sizable majority of people, and even a majority of gun owners support the ideas put forward by Biden in his recent speech. But as we see every day, we are not ruled by the majority. We’re ruled by lobbyists. And gun lobbyists are almost as powerful as fossil fuel lobbyists… with their main weakness being only 1 Democrat on their side. But there might never be 60 votes in the Senate for the Democrats, so it’s probably good enough for the gun lobby to keep getting whatever they want. And with LaPierre’s well-documented illegal activities, we know he has no moral compass.

And when you have more guns than people, they invariably end up where they don’t belong:



			2-year-old fatally shot dad after finding ‘easily accessible’ gun, Florida sheriff says


----------



## AG_PhamD

Eric said:


> Eric said:
> 
> 
> 
> Can someone please explain to us how this MF still has a job? He's directly responsible for several of these murders.
> 
> CNN reporter threatened with trespassing after grilling Uvalde police chief over his actions during shooting​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CNN reporter threatened with trespassing after grilling Uvalde police chief
> 
> 
> Shimon Prokupecz had earlier been grilling police chief Pedro Arredondo about his actions during the Uvalde shooting
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.independent.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It’s quite fascinating. Does this Police Chief just so happen to be in a position of where he cannot be ousted or people are afraid to, or are people actually protecting him? The fact he allowed himself to be sworn into the city counsel is astounding in light of the scrutiny he is under.
> 
> The incident with the CNN reporter, who btw has done some outstanding reporting, seems like a possible trend. The outspoken mother who was handcuffed by police, convinced them to let her go, and then climbed over a fence past the police to rescue her children reports receiving threats from law enforcement about speaking out. https://people.com/crime/uvalde-mom-says-she-was-handcuffed-threatened/
> 
> Given how bungled the police response was, particularly under this chief (if the situation wasn’t so horrific their failures could be a storyline in SuperTroopers), the lies and deception since the very first press conference (BS-meter was redlining), and the refusal to answer the publics questions, I think it’s time the state or feds step in and take over. This is just so ridiculous. I will preface this by saying I don’t wish harm upon anyone, but don’t know how one lives with themselves when they make such grievous errors in judgement, but how do you live with yourself when this is how you handle the aftermath. Many first responders who do all the right things within their power struggle with guilt.
> 
> I would also like to say, if you’re the police chief of a school system you better know how to handle a school shooting and be mentally prepared for all that entails. On the other hand, maybe school system police chiefs should not be the one to handle such crises. Seriously, if your job is to supervise the security of K-12 schools, you’re probably not the most tactically skilled or high-risk comfortable cop. Whereas regular cops who work in the “real world” probably encounter a lot more stressful situations far more frequently and probably be better equipped to handle it. Maybe I’m wrong, idk. But it’s quite clear this particular Police Chief should not be in any leadership position- be it in Police or City Counsel.
Click to expand...


----------



## JayMysteri0

An opinion piece-



> ADHD-2A: The diagnosis, treatment and causes of America’s deadliest 'mental health issue'
> 
> 
> To be fair, the amateur forensic analysts who love to claim that “guns don’t kill people” are actually correct.
> 
> 
> 
> thegrio.com





> Today, more than 300 Americans will catch an infectious disease whose survival rate (42 percent) is lower than the five-year survival rates for cancer (69 percent), HIV (67 percent) or the toxic political illness known as “wokeness” (99.9 percent).
> 
> It’s called “guns.”
> 
> To be fair, the amateur forensic analysts who allege that “guns don’t kill people” are actually correct. After all, it’s the bullet-related body piercings that killed 45,222 Americans in 2020. Contrary to popular belief, cigarettes don’t cause lung cancer; setting them on fire and inhaling the smoke is what causes all the problems. For that matter, texting and driving is a perfectly safe activity until the automobile runs into another object. The details are important.
> 
> Pro-gun advocates have used this logic to explain why the availability of guns isn’t a contributing factor to the injuries and deaths caused by white supremacist terrorist attacks, school shootings and Dick Cheney hunting expeditions. According to Republican politicians, the National Rifle Association and the medical investigative journalists at Fox News, the gun epidemic is actually a mental health issue. The most advanced medical minds in the world have searched for a cure for this mental illness for years, to no avail.
> 
> But recently, researchers at the Social Organization Making an Effort to End Violent Interactions by Leveraging Psychological Research to Investigate the Causes of Killing in Society (SOMEEVILPRICKS) announced that they have finally sequenced the gene that causes this mass-casualty malady.





> What is ADHD-2A?​Also known as Micropenis Replacement Theory and Type II DieYouBishes, the American Delusional Hypocricy on Defending the Second Amendment (ADHD-2A) is a genetic mutation that results in the underdevelopment of certain parts of the brain.
> 
> Yes, it is a mental illness.
> 
> What else could make a person ignore the common denominator in mass shootings and instead attribute America’s ongoing murder pandemic to abortions, video games, pornography, Black people and–my favorite–too many doors? It’s got to be a special kind of crazy that makes someone keep a running tally on how many people are killed in Chicago every weekend while opposing reasonable gun reform laws. Other countries have abortions, _Call of Duty_ and Pornhub but, when it comes to suicide by firearm, gun ownership and mass shootings, America is truly exceptional.
> 
> ADHD-2A causes people to believe that the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution affords _everyone _the right to own _any gun_—even if they have no interest in being part of a “well-regulated militia.” White supremacist weekend warriors understand why they can’t waltz into Walmart and purchase anti-aircraft missiles or why 2-year-olds don’t get gun licenses. But, because ADHD-2A attacks the area of the brain responsible for common sense, sufferers cannot fathom the idea of_ common-sense gun control._





> Causes​The first case of ADHD-2A occurred on Monday, June 22, 1788, when Founding Father George Mason argued that James Madison had put “a great deal of the poverty of the people of Virginia in jeopardy” and endangered the “peace and tranquility” of all Americans.
> 
> “In this state there are two hundred and thirty-six thousand blacks, and there are many in several other states,” he told Virginia’s ratifying convention. “When men are free from restraint, how long will you suspend their fury? The interval between this and bloodshed is but a moment. The licentious and wicked of the community will seize with avidity everything you hold. In this unhappy situation, what is to be done?” To ease Mason’s mind about angry, evil Blacks coming to kill all the white people, Madison quickly scribbled the shortest of the 10 amendments that would become known as the Bill of Rights:
> 
> _“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.”_
> 
> Since that day, ADHD-2A has flourished in America. It turned schizophrenic slaveowners in 13 states into traitors against their own country. Stricken by a mental illness that made them want to start a white supremacist human trafficking utopia, they sparked what still stands as the bloodiest war on the North American continent. And it all happened because ADHD-2A made some sick-in-the-head white boys too lazy to pull themselves up by their bootstraps.
> 
> Under the delusion of ADHD-2A, people afflicted by this disease have tried to kill nine American presidents, with four successful assassination attempts.


----------



## SuperMatt

The idea of gun culture when it relates to emergencies is that the “responsible gun owners” (‘aka “good guys with guns”) are tough, manly men who will save everybody.

In Uvalde, dozens of these heavily armed tough guys were too scared to go in after one shooter, allowing him to kill more of their town’s children, possibly waiting until he ran out of bullets. Who did run in? An unarmed mother who they handcuffed and told not to. 

Had they gone in immediately, there were kids who wouldn’t have been shot, and kids that got shot who could have been saved before bleeding to death.

Why do many gun rights folks want to separate out the “militia” part of the 2nd amendment? Perhaps the idea that they could be called up to fight for their country scares them…


----------



## Herdfan

JayMysteri0 said:


> So, of those guns you brought out of fear of them possibly being banned, how many were actually banned?
> 
> Historically how many such guns have actually ever been banned?
> 
> I wasn't aware of several federal bans on semi automatic, military style .50 cal rifles, handguns or even large capacity magazines.  We did have prohibitions but they expired in 2004.
> 
> Because it again is a purchase based on a fear.  Even if it hasn't ever been a justified fear.




Well, my bump stock was banned, several of my magazines have been made illegal in certain jurisdictions and I do think my AR's will be made illegal at some point.


----------



## SuperMatt

Herdfan said:


> Well, my bump stock was banned, several of my magazines have been made illegal in certain jurisdictions and I do think my AR's will be made illegal at some point.



Watch a video of the Las Vegas shooting and listen to how fast those bullets were flying out. 90 bullets in 10 seconds. And you still want a bump stock? Even the NRA supported getting rid of them. How can anybody be more extreme than the NRA? It truly boggles my mind.


----------



## Roller

Herdfan said:


> Well here is something that makes me happy, but probaby will make most of you here nervous....
> 
> Black gun ownership is increasing and that is a great thing.  But I wonder if all these Black American gun owners are going to be happy with the Dems wanting to limit their newly discovered 2A rights?



I'll leave aside your flawed interpretation of the second amendment as an unfettered right for people to keep arms of any type in the context of a well-regulated militia. And why limit it to guns? Arms includes methods not even conceived of when it was written in 1791.

If experience has taught us one thing, it should be that humans are terrible at making rational decisions in the heat of the moment. That is why police officers and others who may have to use deadly force in the conduct of their duties are supposed to be highly trained so that their drilling kicks in when they're in a highly-charged situation. Unfortunately, we've seen how that doesn't always work as it's supposed to.

Do you really think you and your family are safer outside your home, where even normally well-behaved people with concealed weapons may react impulsively to something you do or say? And that doesn't account for the truly deranged folks who decide to kill a judge who sentenced them, a doctor who didn't provide the outcome they wanted, or some other perceived slight.

Other countries have recognized that what we do is madness, but our answer is always the same: more guns in more hands.


----------



## Herdfan

Roller said:


> I'll leave aside your flawed interpretation of the second amendment as an unfettered right for people to keep arms of any type in the context of a well-regulated militia. And why limit it to guns? Arms includes methods not even conceived of when it was written in 1791.




Again, based on that interpretation, the 1A only extends to spoken speech and newspapers.

And there are SCOTUS rulings that beg to differ with your interpretation.


----------



## JayMysteri0

Herdfan said:


> Well, my bump stock was banned, several of my magazines have been made illegal in certain jurisdictions and I do think my AR's will be made illegal at some point.



Which brings us to the point many people have made.

What do you need a bump stock for?  Why were the magazines made illegal in certain jurisdictions?  Most importantly why does a civilian need an AR?

For hunting?

For Sport?

If each of those things were never sold to the public & kept for military use only, would you NEED them?  Would you be unable to enjoy shooting as a hobby or sport?  Would it prevent you from hunting?  Would you be unable to fetishize such things?

Those are NOT weapons you NEED, but WANT because they were MADE available to sell.  If those things were NEVER made available for sale to the public, you wouldn't miss them if guns were really for sport, hunting, or collecting to you.  It's all about the fear what you can't have, because it was marketed to you as that way.


----------



## Herdfan

JayMysteri0 said:


> Which brings us to the point many people have made.
> 
> What do you need a bump stock for?  Why were the magazines made illegal in certain jurisdictions?  Most importantly why does a civilian need an AR?




Because I like going out and shooting.  Bump stocks are fun.  Can't hit the broad side of a barn with one, but they are fun to try and find the sweet spot.


----------



## JayMysteri0

Herdfan said:


> Because I like going out and shooting.  Bump stocks are fun.  Can't hit the broad side of a barn with one, but they are fun to try and find the sweet spot.



Yes, but that was NOT the question.  Don't just cherry pick the parts you think can handle.

Do you NEED them to enjoy going out to shoot?

Would your joy in shooting cease without the bump stock?

IF the bump stock was NEVER sold to you in the first place, would that have stopped you from going out to shoot?

Do you understand why the need was felt to keep bump stocks out of civilian hands?


----------



## SuperMatt

Herdfan said:


> Because I like going out and shooting.  Bump stocks are fun.  Can't hit the broad side of a barn with one, but they are fun to try and find the sweet spot.




Your fun is more important than others’ lives.

And there is the gun “rights” argument laid bare.


----------



## DT

Target shooting?  Get a Benjamin air rifle in .177 or .22, accurate, nice options, super inexpensive to shoot (entry price is upper-moderate for an air rifle).

Hunting for sport?  Bow. Period.  Everything else is just being an animal sniper.

Let's be real:  the reason for having AR for "plinking" or a bump stop for "fun" is because there's an underlying gun empowerment hardon.


----------



## SuperMatt

DT said:


> Target shooting?  Get a Benjamin air rifle in .177 or .22, accurate, nice options, super inexpensive to shoot (entry price is upper-moderate for an air rifle).
> 
> Hunting for sport?  Bow. Period.  Everything else is just being an animal sniper.
> 
> Let's be real:  the reason for having AR for "plinking" or a bump stop for "fun" is because there's an underlying gun empowerment hardon.




Yes, many claim they need their guns to overthrow a tyrant. Really?

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1531312016480260099/


----------



## SuperMatt

Jonathan Capehart, writing for the Washington Post, responds to those advocating for black people to buy more guns.



> This present-day Black fear of White violence was perfectly expressed by Rob Redding, one of the everyday people interviewed for a Post report on how 1 in 3 Americans believe that violence against the government can be justified. Redding told The Post that the Jan. 6 insurrectionists stormed the Capitol seeking to “subvert American democracy because now it’s becoming equal for all people.” He spoke approvingly of arming himself and added, “I’m a Black man in America. … I believe in protecting myself.” Notice he’s not protecting himself against the government. He’s protecting himself against “crazy” White people.
> 
> When it comes to Black folks acquiring weapons, Redding is in the minority. According to that Post-Ipsos poll, 51 percent of African Americans said they have not considered buying a gun since the Buffalo massacre. Why is no mystery. The right to self-protection, let alone the right to bear arms, doesn’t exactly apply to Black people.
> 
> Think about it. Imagine I get a gun for self-protection (not that I ever would, but stay with me). A situation arises in which I use it to protect myself. But then the cops arrive, see a gun, “fear for their lives,” and, well, the rest writes itself. Remember Philando Castile? We can’t win.








__





						Loading…
					





					wapo.st
				



(Paywall removed)


----------



## Roller

Herdfan said:


> Again, based on that interpretation, the 1A only extends to spoken speech and newspapers.
> 
> And there are SCOTUS rulings that beg to differ with your interpretation.



The constitution and the Bill of Rights were written more than 200 years ago by people who could not have foreseen the technological and social milieu 21st century. So we have to determine how to balance original intent with the realities of the modern world. Hence, it makes sense that the 1st amendment applies to modes of communication other than speech and the press. But conversely, if the the 2nd amendment were taken to mean all arms, individuals would be able to own any weapon, no matter how destructive. That makes no sense in a civilized society.

However, you failed to answer my question about personal safety. Is putting more guns in the hands of people who aren't trained to use them appropriately (I'm referring to when, in addition to how to use them) really going to make everyone safer, especially when folks can easily purchase semi-automatic weapons that can kill dozens in a few moments?


----------



## Herdfan

SuperMatt said:


> Your fun is more important than others’ lives.
> 
> And there is the gun “rights” argument laid bare.




Given that my guns haven't shot anyone, this is a hollow argument.  My rights don't go away because of something someone else does.

But, I read an Op-Ed on CNN this morning with a possible solution.  The ATF can change the classification of all semi-automatic rifles to Class 3.  This means real BGC's, renewed annually.  So a 6-12 month wait vs 6-12 minutes.  

And I believe the ATF can do this unilaterally without Congressional approval, but Congress can over-rule them.

The big question is what happens with existing AR's.  Mine is no problem  I would just need to let the ATF know I have an additional Class 3 weapon.  But other people won't be willing to go through the BGC process and some will fail.  So does the government buy them back?  Or maybe people can donate them to a local PD for a $1000 tax credit.


----------



## SuperMatt

Herdfan said:


> Given that my guns haven't shot anyone, this is a hollow argument. My rights don't go away because of something someone else does.



The permissive bump stock law allowed you to have fun with high-speed automatic fire. It also allowed killers to fire 90 rounds in 10 seconds. Sorry, preventing that is more important than you having fun at the range. Even Trump was able to see that. Perhaps you are so enamored with your own fun times with guns, that you don’t see the connection between overly permissive laws and the carnage at schools and across America.

I might find it fun to set off a nuclear explosion because I like looking at the mushroom cloud. I promise I do it in a safe space. So why shouldn’t nuclear weapons be legal for everybody? If somebody sets one off in the middle of a city, they were just a bad person, and it’s a mental health issue. Oh well, too bad a few million people died. Nothing to be done except get more good people with ICBMs.


----------



## Herdfan

SuperMatt said:


> The permissive bump stock law allowed you to have fun with high-speed automatic fire. It also allowed killers to fire 90 rounds in 10 seconds.




I am going to guess, and please correct me if I am wrong, that you have never fired with a bump stock.  It is hard to get the timing right to find the sweet spot.  And incredibly difficult to hit a target.  The guy in Vegas, given what he was firing at it might have made sense.  I think individual shots through a scope would have caused more carnage, but what do I know as I have only been shooting for 50 years.

Also, since they are now banned, I no longer have one.  So please stop assuming I do and projecting what I might or might do with one.


----------



## SuperMatt

Herdfan said:


> I am going to guess, and please correct me if I am wrong, that you have never fired with a bump stock.  It is hard to get the timing right to find the sweet spot.  And incredibly difficult to hit a target.  The guy in Vegas, given what he was firing at it might have made sense.  I think individual shots through a scope would have caused more carnage, but what do I know as I have only been shooting for 50 years.
> 
> Also, since they are now banned, I no longer have one.  So please stop assuming I do and projecting what I might or might do with one.



It's...

NOT
ABOUT
YOU.

It’s about public safety. I’m sure YOU are the safest gun owner in the world. Just like I would be the safest nuclear bomb owner in the world if I had one (probably). Having the weapons widely available means that irresponsible people WILL get them. People with ill intent WILL get them. So we need to make sure they are much harder to get, and that semi-automatic ones are nigh-impossible to obtain.

And, congratulations on not keeping illegal bump stocks around, I guess. Do you want a medal for (begrudgingly) following the law?


----------



## Herdfan

SuperMatt said:


> And, congratulations on not keeping illegal bump stocks around, I guess. Do you want a medal for (begrudgingly) following the law?




I have 2 full autos.  So not really a sacrifice.

And when my rights are violated, it is 100% about me.


----------



## SuperMatt

Herdfan said:


> I have 2 full autos.  So not really a sacrifice.
> 
> And when my rights are violated, it is 100% about me.




Yes, that was made very clear during the mask debate.

There are other people in the world. They don’t want to see their little kids shot. So at some point, sanity will prevail, and their rights to live will supersede others’ rights to impulse-buy military-style weapons at the drop of a hat. It’s not if… it’s when.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

For many white Americans, the idea of the gun is all they have left
					

White Americans cling to the gun as a symbol of strength and independence. They see its loss as a final, fatal blow




					www.salon.com
				




The short of it is many white Americans feel it's the last thing left that gives them the sense of control and power while gangster capitalism and the our oligarch controlled government is stripping everything else away.


----------



## SuperMatt

SuperMatt said:


> Glad to see there is consensus on so many of these reforms. Biden called for almost all of these during his speech this week.
> 
> Sadly, I feel there is no hope of Republicans adopting even one of them though.
> 
> Remember when Mitch McConnell assigned Tim Scott to address police violence in 2020, and he pretended to work on it, then decided to do nothing after a year? It will be the same with Sen. Cornyn and the gun control measures.
> 
> Have somebody ”work on it” for a while but then come up with nothing and blame the liberals. They just want to look like they care until enough time passes for emotions to calm down. Then they will walk away. You’ll see.




Today, Senators are calling for patience on legislation to protect kids from gun violence. From the Washington Post:



> The top Republican negotiator, Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.), issued a similar plea for patience Monday, counseling his colleagues against setting “artificial deadlines.”
> 
> “I don’t believe the Senate will be voting this week, because good consensus legislation takes time,” he said. “My goal is to achieve a result. And the only way we can do that, the only way we can get a bill that will pass both chambers and earn the president’s signature, is by taking the time and reaching that consensus.”




See my post above. I’m concerned this means history will repeat itself.


----------



## Yoused

SuperMatt said:


> I might find it fun to set off a nuclear explosion because I like looking at the mushroom cloud. I promise I do it in a safe space. So why shouldn’t nuclear weapons be legal for everybody?



We had lunch in a place in downtown Portland where the waitress, Kyoko, was as old as my mother – she was in Hiroshima Japan on August 6th of '45. She saw the cloud and she told us it was a beautiful swarm of shifting colors. So, yeah, you will never get a chance to see that first-hand. Damn bomb-control laws.


----------



## Huntn

Herdfan said:


> Well, my bump stock was banned, several of my magazines have been made illegal in certain jurisdictions and I do think my AR's will be made illegal at some point.



I’d like to see a ban on semi-automatic long guns. You don’t need them for hunting. It’s kind of unfair…


----------



## Herdfan

SuperMatt said:


> Yes, that was made very clear during the mask debate.
> 
> There are other people in the world. They don’t want to see their little kids shot. So at some point, sanity will prevail, and their rights to live will supersede others’ *rights to impulse-buy military-style weapons at the drop of a hat. *It’s not if… it’s when.




Hence why I agree that they should be categorized as Class 3 weapons.  If you don't know what that means, look it up.


----------



## Herdfan

Huntn said:


> I’d like to see a ban on semi-automatic long guns. You don’t need them for hunting. It’s kind of unfair…




And my 300 WinMag isn't?


----------



## GermanSuplex

Hmm, I really like the idea of a high sales tax on weapons. One legislature released a bill that would add a 1,000% sales tax to assault rifles - it could pass the house with no Republican votes and require a simple majority in the senate. I doubt it will see much action, but the idea is a good one.


----------



## fooferdoggie

Herdfan said:


> I have 2 full autos.  So not really a sacrifice.
> 
> And when my rights are violated, it is 100% about me.



what rights? what part of this are you?
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.


----------



## ronntaylor

Herdfan said:


> Black gun ownership is increasing and that is a great thing. But I wonder if all these Black American gun owners are going to be happy with the Dems wanting to limit their newly discovered 2A rights?




What a bucket of Bullshit! Unlike the gun craziness of the NRA, the increase in Black gun ownership and continuing popularity of the NAAGA is about common sense, and as already mentioned by others here, due to the fears of increasing white supremacy (sic) since before your Mango president (essentially since President Obama's election drove your ilk crazy).



> [NAAGA Founder Philip] Smith attributed part of the growth to "a political climate where people with racist views feel emboldened to *talk about and act on those views*".[4]
> ...
> *After the shooting of Philando Castile, NAAGA immediately condemned the shooting while the NRA did not*.


----------



## Eric

This guy is not kidding either, every time you see them on the news they're almost cross-eyed and insane about keeping assault weapons. It's flat out scary.


This is deadly serious from
      WhitePeopleTwitter


----------



## SuperMatt

Eric said:


> This guy is not kidding either, every time you see them on the news they're almost cross-eyed and insane about keeping assault weapons. It's flat out scary.
> 
> 
> This is deadly serious from
> WhitePeopleTwitter




They have perverted the meaning of the 2nd amendment. 

On one hand, they want everybody to ignore the “well regulated militia” bit so that they can affirm it as an individual right, free of any commitment to defend their country.

On the other hand, they want to claim the “militia” part as essential because they say they need the guns to defend against tyrannical leaders. But they get that wrong too because the point of the militia is not for armed rebellion against one’s own country. It is for the “security of a Free State.” Not for the overthrow of it. And the closest we came to a tyrannical leader was Trump who refused to voluntarily step down after losing an election. I didn’t see a single gun-rights advocate saying “If he won’t leave office, we might need to take him down!”

These are not patriots. They are traitors. Anybody calling for an armed rebellion against the American government is a traitor. Period. But their explanation? Biden is a tyrant. So we see the line from “Let’s Go Brandon” which is based on painting Biden as a tyrant regardless of what he says or does, straight to excusing an armed rebellion.

The gun rights movement has become inseparable from the far-right GOP white supremacist movement. I’m sure there are some white supremacists who don’t care about guns much, and some gun rights folks who aren’t white supremacists. But not many these days.


----------



## Joe

Y'all seem surprised. I've been saying this for months. I am surrounded by these crazies so I know what they are capable of. 

Black people are buying guns now to protect themselves from white supremacy. I said that would happen long ago, and I told minorities to do that because crazy white people are the real terrorist in this country. 

White people are scared. They will destroy this country before giving up power in their eyes. The same people that filled up swimming pools and closed down parks so they didn't have to share them with Black people will destroy this country before giving it up. 

They're ready to destroy this country yet call themselves Patriots lmao


----------



## JayMysteri0

When you are running out of ANY desperate idea to blame ANYTHING but the guns.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1534568624702337026/

Signs.  Jesus.  Just save us the time and just tell us you are an asshole for guns & don't want anything really done.


----------



## SuperMatt

JayMysteri0 said:


> When you are running out of ANY desperate idea to blame ANYTHING but the guns.
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1534568624702337026/
> 
> Signs.  Jesus.  Just save us the time and just tell us you are an asshole for guns & don't want anything really done.



It makes perfect sense. Insane mass murderers only target areas with “gun free zone” signs. Take them down - problem solved! Why didn’t we all think of it sooner?


----------



## JayMysteri0

Stop being fucking stupid please!!  

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1534557129696231430/



> GOP Rep. Steve Scalise argues against gun control measures and says, ‘there wasn’t a conversation about banning airplanes’ after the events of 9/11, even though airport security measures were increased drastically after the attacks in 2001




_I Have to unplug._


----------



## SuperMatt

JayMysteri0 said:


> Stop being fucking stupid please!!
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1534557129696231430/
> 
> 
> 
> _I Have to unplug._



He almost died in a mass shooting… and this is his response? What is wrong with this guy’s brain?


----------



## Eric

SuperMatt said:


> He almost died in a mass shooting… and this is his response? What is wrong with this guy’s brain?



Same reason antivaxxers bash medical science with their last breath on a ventilator I suspect, they'll literally die for their beliefs when it's 100% preventable.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Maybe we should use some reverse psychology and gun control advocates can organize minority gun owner parades. Kids getting slaughtered? Worth it. A bunch of armed non whites parading down the street. Horrifying and something should be done.

It worked on Reagan in the 60’s, then the governor of California. A group of armed black panthers went to the capitol, perfectly legal. Months later open carry was outlawed in the state. Hmm.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

National Terrorism Advisory System Bulletin - June 7, 2022 | Homeland Security
					






					www.dhs.gov
				




Biggest threat to Americans is…Americans, in both being unhinged and disinformation sponges.  So good job. #1.  Exceptionalism.


----------



## SuperMatt

God bless Zeneta Everhart, mother of a survivor from the Buffalo terrorist attack. She succinctly drew a clear line from the origins of America straight up to the white power terrorism of 2022. She also pointed out the absurdity of the terrorist’s parents giving a 16-year old kid a shotgun for their birthday… by comparing it to the gifts she gave her son: video games, pizza, and a cake.

I was stirred by her 8-minute speech. I hope at least a few Republican members of Congress are as well.





__





						Loading…
					





					wapo.st
				



(paywall removed)


----------



## ronntaylor

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> Maybe we should use some reverse psychology and gun control advocates can organize minority gun owner parades. Kids getting slaughtered? Worth it. A bunch of armed non whites parading down the street. Horrifying and something should be done.



Nah, we good! We don't want to fall victim to SOP and wind up dead due to some punk in blue declaring: "I feared for my life!"


----------



## SuperMatt

Facebook supposedly doesn’t allow the sale of guns on its platform. You’d think they might have a “3-strikes” rule for gun sellers just in case there was a mistake the first or 2nd time. Nope… they have a 10-strikes rule.

You only get 5 strikes if you advertise guns while actively advocating for violence or hate groups. I’m sure the first 4 times they advertised guns to overthrow the government was just a wee mistake.

And Texas thinks these companies need LESS moderation?



> Gun sellers have seized on loopholes within Facebook’s policy. Journalists have repeatedly uncovered strategies sellers use to evade bans while reaching potential customers in dedicated Facebook groups or on Facebook Marketplace, the company’s classified services. One tactic is advertising gun accessories, like holsters or cases, which are permitted for sale on the platform; once a customer contacts the seller, a gun can be sold in Facebook’s private messages or through text message. After responding to several listings for gun cases, a Post reporter received three private messages with offers to purchase a gun.








__





						Loading…
					





					wapo.st
				



(paywall removed)


----------



## SuperMatt

Poll: Support for controlling gun violence hits its highest point in a decade
					

About 6 in 10 now say controlling gun violence is more important than protecting gun rights. But independents are split on some key measures, and President Biden's approval rating hits his worst mark.




					www.npr.org
				




Americans, 59%-35%, say controlling gun violence is more important than protecting gun rights. Time for Congress to fulfill the will of the people instead of their NRA overlords.

Speaking of the NRA, only 27% of Americans said they’d vote for a candidate who took campaign money from the NRA. If people REALLY did what that poll says (let’s face it they probably won’t) - we’d have Democrats with a 3/4 majority In Congress.


----------



## Herdfan

SuperMatt said:


> Poll: Support for controlling gun violence hits its highest point in a decade
> 
> 
> About 6 in 10 now say controlling gun violence is more important than protecting gun rights. But independents are split on some key measures, and President Biden's approval rating hits his worst mark.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.npr.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Americans, 59%-35%, say controlling gun violence is more important than protecting gun rights. Time for Congress to fulfill the will of the people instead of their NRA overlords.
> 
> Speaking of the NRA, only 27% of Americans said they’d vote for a candidate who took campaign money from the NRA. If people REALLY did what that poll says (let’s face it they probably won’t) - we’d have Democrats with a 3/4 majority In Congress.




Except support for an assault weapons hit its lowest point since the polling began in 2013.  In the recent poll, Americans supported the ban 50-45.  Nothing will happen with those numbers.  So blame the NRA all you want, their 3M members don't have that much sway.









						Nearly 3 Out Of 4 Support Raising Legal Age To Buy Any Gun, Quinnipiac University National Poll Finds; Support For Assault Weapons Ban Hits A Low | Quinnipiac University Poll
					

"As mass murders by teenage killers tear at the heart of the country, Americans say by a three to one margin, you should be 21 to buy a gun," said Quinnipiac University Polling Analyst Tim Malloy.




					poll.qu.edu


----------



## Yoused

SuperMatt said:


> Speaking of the NRA, only 27% of Americans said they’d vote for a candidate who took campaign money from the NRA.




"_I don't take any money from the NRA, and I have nothing to do with that *Me*PAC that does._"


----------



## SuperMatt

Herdfan said:


> Except support for an assault weapons hit its lowest point since the polling began in 2013.  In the recent poll, Americans supported the ban 50-45.  Nothing will happen with those numbers.  So blame the NRA all you want, their 3M members don't have that much sway.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nearly 3 Out Of 4 Support Raising Legal Age To Buy Any Gun, Quinnipiac University National Poll Finds; Support For Assault Weapons Ban Hits A Low | Quinnipiac University Poll
> 
> 
> "As mass murders by teenage killers tear at the heart of the country, Americans say by a three to one margin, you should be 21 to buy a gun," said Quinnipiac University Polling Analyst Tim Malloy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> poll.qu.edu



That is the definition of spin. Just key on one question in the poll and ignore the rest, including the headline of the poll you linked: 75% of people want the gun age raised. 

So what if the “assault weapons” question doesn’t have a super majority? We know for a fact that term has been poisoned due to over a decade of incessant whining from ammosexuals “well you don’t know what an assault weapon really is…” blah blah blah STFU. So now people can’t even define the term, so how can they even really answer the question? Mission accomplished by the ”I love seeing kids brutally murdered because it means we will sell more guns” NRA. Despite that lengthy campaign of confusion, a majority of people still want them GONE.

Meanwhile:

As both linked polls show, most people want more gun control, and Congress isn’t doing anything about it… because the NRA controls the Republican Party. They don’t care about everybody else. They don’t care about little kids. They couldn’t care less about their parents who had to identify decapitated corpses and could only identify their 10-year-old kids with DNA. GOP politicians only care about staying in power. The NRA only cares about the industry they represent, and the gun lovers only care about protecting their personal stash. What a goddamn pathetic display of absolute selfishness. 

So don’t give me that shit about NRA members not having a say. They are about 1% of the population; over 90% of Americans want universal background checks… and guess what we still don’t have, all because of the NRA!

The GOP already delayed the gun bill. Now they will see the Jan 6 hearings lambasting Trump and his corrupt lackeys. They will get their panties in a twist over it and say they can’t negotiate with the mean ol’ Democrats on anything, including gun regulations supported by 3/4 or more of Americans. And once again, Congress will do nothing about gun violence. All because they care more about their fucking NRA “Grade” of A+ than about the lives of children.

Between the guns issue and the abortion issue, the GOP is now backing policies opposed by 2/3rds or more of America. I hope this means Americans will vote them out. But I won’t hold my breath.


----------



## Herdfan

SuperMatt said:


> That is the definition of spin. Just key on one question in the poll and ignore the rest, including the headline of the poll you linked: 75% of people want the gun age raised.
> 
> So what if the “assault weapons” question doesn’t have a super majority?




Not spin.  Just pointing out that people are truly split on banning semi-automatic weapons.  And as such, it will be hard to move that needle politically.


----------



## SuperMatt

Herdfan said:


> Not spin.  Just pointing out that people are truly split on banning semi-automatic weapons.  And as such, it will be hard to move that needle politically.



The question doesn’t say “semi automatic” though. See what I said about the decade-long effort to confuse the meaning of the term “‘assault weapon.”


----------



## Herdfan

SuperMatt said:


> The question doesn’t say “semi automatic” though. See what I said about the decade-long effort to confuse the meaning of the term “‘assault weapon.”




No but since there is no real definition of assault weapon, I try not to use it.  To many people think AR stands for Assault Rifle.


----------



## SuperMatt

Herdfan said:


> No but since there is no real definition of assault weapon, I try not to use it.  To many people think AR stands for Assault Rifle.



And this right here is the reason the “assault weapon” question on a poll is meaningless... as I said repeatedly above.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Herdfan said:


> Not spin.  Just pointing out that people are truly split on banning semi-automatic weapons.  And as such, it will be hard to move that needle politically.





I read an article earlier that said as a compromise they could change the classification of the AR-15 (including "style"?) to a class that is already on the books that includes a lot more oversite including training and annual registration.  Would you have a problem with that, and if so, why?

It was written by a former police officer and gun salesmen who said there is no real practical reason for anybody to own those and he has multiple guns for multiple purposes.  The AR-15 doesn't serve any purpose for him.  The only reason law enforcement needs them is because the idiots in the industry decided it was a good idea to sell them to the general public which outgunned the police.  So on that one I suppose somebody could make the argument "I need one to protect me from the bad guys who have one".  Doesn't mean it hasn't happened, but I don't think I've ever heard of a situation where a random good guy with an AR-15 took out a bad guy with an AR-15.   I'm sure you could probably share a link to where that did in fact happen, but does it even come close to the amount of times innocent people were killed by one?


----------



## Yoused

Herdfan said:


> No but since there is no real definition of assault weapon, I try not to use it.



Then I will offer one:

 performs a clear/chamber cycle when a round is fired with no additional action on the part of the shooter
 has a magazine capacity greater than 5 rounds
 can handle a fast magazine swap (in under 2 seconds) while the shooter's hand remains in ready to shoot position
That is a pretty tight description that covers a lot of weapons. Those are weapons that the owners should have to license yearly, as one would a vehicle: they would not be "banned" but would be highly regulated. That is what I would do, that would, I think, not "infringe" 2A rights.


----------



## Herdfan

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> I read an article earlier that said as a compromise they could change the classification of the AR-15 (including "style"?) to a class that is already on the books that includes a lot more oversite including training and annual registration.  Would you have a problem with that, and if so, why?




Proposed that very thing in this thread not long ago.

It is called Class 3 and it is the license you need to own full autos, grenades, mortars, howitzers, etc (yes people can own them if they are willing to jump though the hoops).

To get a Class 3 license you need to get approval from your local jurisdiction's chief law enforcement officer.  In my case, it was the Sheriff.  (I was ready to buy an M-16 many years ago, but the Sheriff at the time refused to sign off, so I had to wait until he was term limited out.  By that time the price had gone from $8K to over $20K).  Then you get a real background check with fingerprints and it takes several months to complete.  Only then can you buy the weapon.  And you have to update your BGC every year.  And you have to notify the ATF if you are taking your weapon to another state.  So every year when I take my Ruger Mini 14 to my friend's farm in KY, I have to fill out an ATF Form 5320.20.  And wait until they send you back permission.  

So yeah, that would solve a lot of the issues of someone buying one just because they think it's cool or buying one on an impulse.


----------



## Herdfan

Yoused said:


> Then I will offer one:
> 
> performs a clear/chamber cycle when a round is fired with no additional action on the part of the shooter
> has a magazine capacity greater than 5 rounds
> can handle a fast magazine swap (in under 2 seconds) while the shooter's hand remains in ready to shoot position
> That is a pretty tight description that covers a lot of weapons. Those are weapons that the owners should have to license yearly, as one would a vehicle: they would not be "banned" but would be highly regulated. That is what I would do, that would, I think, not "infringe" 2A rights.




That right there folks is a good description.  My only concern is that as  you have written it, it would apply to most semi-auto pistols.

Notice there is no nonsense about "scary looking features" that a good gunsmith can get around in less than a day and do nothing in terms of safety.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Herdfan said:


> So yeah, that would solve a lot of the issues of someone buying one just because they think it's cool or buying one on an impulse.




The author of the article I read also said during his gun selling days he tried to get an idea of what they were looking to use the gun for so he could steer them towards the best option.  A lot of the AR-15 people just wanted one because they wanted one and there was really no logical or practical reason for it.     

I wouldn't say that's a red flag for a possible mass shooter, but it seems like some kind of flag for a possible irresponsible gun owner at minimum, especially considering the relatively easy purchasing access.


----------



## Citysnaps

Yoused said:


> Then I will offer one:




How about also adding shoots .223 or other high velocity (>3,0000 feet/sec, or some other number, >2,500 feet/sec or whatever) ammunition.


----------



## Citysnaps

Herdfan said:


> Then you get a real background check with fingerprints and it takes several months to complete.




I'm all for real background checks, similar to what one submits to when getting a government security clearance for trustworthiness, character, maturity, addictions, mental health, etc.

You list schools attended, places you've worked, and five personal references.   Investigators talk to past teachers, past work supervisors and co-workers, neighbors from different places you've lived, your personal references, and friends of personal references that might know you, and, look in criminal databases.

It's very thorough. I think that would weed out people with mental health issues, people of questionable maturity/character etc. 

Should that be deemed a little excessive, perhaps 50% - 75% of the above.


----------



## Yoused

Herdfan said:


> My only concern is that as  you have written it, it would apply to most semi-auto pistols.




You mean like the one that was used in Tucson?



citypix said:


> How about also adding shoots .223 or other high velocity (>3,0000 feet/sec, or some other number, >2,500 feet/sec or whatever) ammunition.




I really see no need to exclude wall-of-lead weapons because they are low calibre or light load. The fewer loopholes the better.


----------



## SuperMatt

Protect kids from guns? More than 20 years after Columbine, the answer is still NO.

Protect Supreme Court Justices from guns? IMMEDIATELY!!!

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1534921526511796232/


----------



## Citysnaps

Yoused said:


> I really see no need to exclude wall-of-lead weapons because they are low calibre or light load. The fewer loopholes the better.




I probably don't understand your response.

It's the 0.223 ammo that AR-style weapons shoot, with 3x the velocity of a typical 9mm handgun, with a projectile that's smaller but tumbles in flight, that cause such devastating and usually fatal injuries. To the point of making identification  of victims difficult, often requiring DNA samples.

Shoot a block of ballistic gelatin (designed to replicate human tissue) with a 9mm handgun and the bullet pretty much travels a straight path through the gelatin.  Do the same with an AR-15 style weapon with .223 ammo at 3x the muzzle velocity and the gelatin appears to explode as the bullet traverses through the ballistic gelatin.  Human organs don't stand a chance.


----------



## SuperMatt

The Supreme Court has taken a case about gun restrictions in NY State. Chances are they will make many gun regulations “unconstitutional” in their opinion. 

An example of something Amy Coney Barrett supported in the past is to allow convicted felons to have firearms (Kanter v Barr). But this court hasn’t protected VOTING rights for felons!

Shouldn’t judges, especially Supreme Court Justices, be wise enough to consider what kind of society we create when it’s harder to vote than it is to get guns?

They want 1st and 2nd amendment protections for extremists to attack abortion clinics and gun down their neighbors (respectively). But they put a huge fence around their courthouse to avoid protests and press Congress to protect justices from guns. These overly-expansive rights don’t apply if you are anywhere near the ideologues who supported them. A den of hypocrisy.


----------



## Herdfan

Yoused said:


> You mean like the one that was used in Tucson?




Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.


----------



## Yoused

Herdfan said:


> Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.




Fair enough. But I still fail to see why pistols should be excluded from the definition. the fewer gaps the better. Bear in mind, again, I am not saying "ban" but "regulate to the max".



citypix said:


> It's the 0.223 ammo that AR-style weapons shoot, with 3x the velocity of a typical 9mm handgun, with a projectile that's smaller but tumbles in flight, that cause such devastating and usually fatal injuries. To the point of making identification of victims difficult, often requiring DNA samples.




Well, technically, I do not believe that it tumbles _in flight_ – the spin keeps it flying straight – the tumbling starts after it goes in. But the effect, as you say, is evil. My point is that the more it gets qualified, the more likely loopholes will be found. Not a ban and only a small imposition: if the licensing is too much of a nuisance, head down to the range and get your rocks off with a rental.


----------



## SuperMatt

Remember all the gun-lovers blaming insufficiently secure doors for the tragedy in Uvalde? The school actually had special doors installed to protect against mass murdering terrorists. But the doors actually kept police out once the shooter started brutally murdering little kids.





__





						Loading…
					





					wapo.st
				



(paywall removed)

So, Uvalde basically did everything on the list of the NRA to protect against this. A school police department, special doors, 40% of the town budget on police, a SWAT team for a town of only 13K people, etc. But surprise, surprise…. it still didn’t do anything because a teenager was able to buy weapons of war on credit. So, once again:

IT’S
THE
FUCKING
GUNS

Just cut all this other bullshit out. We shouldn’t have to turn every school in the entire country into a fortified war zone because of the fucking NRA. Vote out every single goddamn member of Congress who opposes gun control. Even far-right Justice Scalia whose 2008 decision was bat-shit crazy and a break with over 200 years of precedent said that guns can be highly regulated.

We are a complete failure as a country if we cannot value children above guns.


----------



## Herdfan

Was watching Bill Maher last night and he finished his show talking about how Hollywood as embraced "wokeness" about as hard as you can in every aspect except one: gun violence.  

While all these actors complain about gun violence, they still cash the checks from movies made with......... gun violence.  

Specifically Maher said:



> but a hero in a movie "getting over a grudge by mowing down a multitude of human beings" is still allowed.




which he followed up with:



> "Because no impressionable young man would ever imitate that,"




I know many of you hate Maher now because he is not a progressive, but does he have a point in your minds?

Should Hollywood simply stop making these movies?


----------



## Yoused

Herdfan said:


> I know many of you hate Maher now because he is not a progressive




"Hate". You really need to cut back on that. Hate is what the White-wing does, and then projects any amount of criticism or reduced affection as "hate". Just knock that shit off. I used to find, for example, Dennis Miller amusing before he morphed into an unrecognizable Hannitoid, but I do not feel any "hate" for him – I rarely think of him at all, and when I am forced to, it is mostly just sadness and pity.

As far as media violence contributing to real world violence, it probably does to some extent, but nowhere near as much as mouthpieces are suggesting. If you were to try to calculate the causal factors of the last few deadly ammofests, violence in media would be one of the thinnest slices. We are a peace-preaching society of violence, and trying to reduce the actual violence by getting rid of the portrayed violence might help a little, but probably only a tiny bit as long as the big slices remain untouched.


----------



## Herdfan

Yoused said:


> As far as media violence contributing to real world violence, it probably does to some extent, but nowhere near as much as mouthpieces are suggesting.




Whether it does or doesn't, I don't want to hear some actor railing against gun violence and then go make millions off a movie in which gun violence is a large part.   That is hypocritical.


----------



## SuperMatt

Yoused said:


> "Hate". Yon really need to cut back on that. Hate is what the White-wing does, and then projects any amount of criticism or reduced affection as "hate". Just knock that shit off. I used to find, for example, Dennis Miller amusing before he morphed into an unrecognizable Hannitoid, but I do not feel any "hate" for him – I rarely think of him at all, and when I am forced to, it is mostly just sadness and pity.
> 
> As far as media violence contributing to real world violence, it probably does to some extent, but nowhere near as much as mouthpieces are suggesting. If you were to try to calculate the causal factors of the last few deadly ammofests, violence in media would be one of the thinnest slices. We are a peace-preaching society of violence, and trying to reduce the actual violence by getting rid of the portrayed violence might help a little, but probably only a tiny bit as long as the big slices remain untouched.



Mortal Kombat used to be perhaps the top video game in America. But I don’t recall a rash of people committing “fatalities” by ripping out people’s spines or throwing them into pits full of spikes.

We have many black and white movies with lots of shooting in them. We had radio programs before that depicting gunfights. This isn’t a recent phenomenon.

So those with a certain agenda will blame doors, or movies, or video games, or dungeons and dragons, or woke parents emasculating their male kids, or, or, or… anything BUT guns. Because it can’t POSSIBLY be the most obvious solution, adopted by many other countries who have solved the problem.


----------



## Citysnaps

SuperMatt said:


> Mortal Kombat used to be perhaps the top video game in America. But I don’t recall a rash of people committing “fatalities” by ripping out people’s spines or throwing them into pits full of spikes.
> 
> We have many black and white movies with lots of shooting in them. We had radio programs before that depicting gunfights. This isn’t a recent phenomenon.
> 
> So those with a certain agenda will blame doors, or movies, or video games, or dungeons and dragons, or woke parents emasculating their male kids, or, or, or… anything BUT guns. Because it can’t POSSIBLY be the most obvious solution, adopted by many other countries who have solved the problem.




Spot on, well stated!


----------



## The-Real-Deal82

SuperMatt said:


> Mortal Kombat used to be perhaps the top video game in America. But I don’t recall a rash of people committing “fatalities” by ripping out people’s spines or throwing them into pits full of spikes.
> 
> We have many black and white movies with lots of shooting in them. We had radio programs before that depicting gunfights. This isn’t a recent phenomenon.
> 
> So those with a certain agenda will blame doors, or movies, or video games, or dungeons and dragons, or woke parents emasculating their male kids, or, or, or… anything BUT guns. Because it can’t POSSIBLY be the most obvious solution, adopted by many other countries who have solved the problem.




I remember in the film ‘Bowling for Columbine’ Michael Moore makes a valid point that all these same violent films and computer games are available and consumed by people in other countries. However, they don’t seem to have individuals walking into schools on a regular basis to shoot kids.

If Britain had the same access to guns and the same thirst for owning them as Americans, I have no doubt we’d see lots of shootings. Imagine going out on a night out but some people are carrying guns? There’s already plenty of fights and I just wouldn’t trust society to be able to handle them. People are strange as Jim Morrison used to say and I already encounter far too many people on my daily commute who have no problem killing you with their appalling driving, let alone letting them have the ‘right’ to carry a firearm lol. No thanks!


----------



## SuperMatt

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1536004155894120449/

The deal reportedly will include some kind of “encouragement“ for states to pass red flag laws (which they are renaming). It will not ban assault weapons. It will not raise the age for buying AR-15s (or equivalents). It will change background checks for 18-20 year old buyers to include checks of their juvenile records. It will include money for school security and mental health.

I support anything to make obtaining these weapons more difficult, but this is pretty weak sauce. And I don’t support the money for school security because we see exactly how that money ACTUALLY gets spent. It’s doors that prevent police from stopping the killer, and police departments that disproportionately target black kids.

I support increased money for mental health services, but if they do it through Medicare or Medicaid, the “Red” states will probably block it anyway.

AND - As I said before, I bet even this weak sauce bill will not get 10 GOP Senators to sign on. The NRA will make sure of it. Even a bill that issued a proclamation that ”gun violence is bad mmmkay” would be opposed by the NRA and Senators wouldn’t support it. Because some Republican candidate even further to the right would run ads in their district saying they want to take away your guns.


----------



## Citysnaps

"Mental health" and "Hardening" are the reflexive GOP goto phrases knowing that will likely not happen.   Hardening schools?  What about churches, synagogues, shopping malls, music venues, night clubs, big box stores, libraries, colleges/universities, and on and on? And mental health?  Will there be a 1-800 number for whenever you're feeling a little crazy in the head? Guaranteed it will be no more than that.

The GOP cares *much* more about guns than slaughtered school children.


----------



## Roller

Here's Chris Murphy's tweet:

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1536013602846560256/

He says getting this passed will be difficult, even though the reforms are modest at best. I wonder if some Democrats, especially in the House, will vote against it because it doesn't go far enough (knowing their vote may not affect the result), just as some/many Republicans will do the same because it places any restrictions on gun ownership.


----------



## Yoused

I kind of wonder if there is a headspace like "_I don't have any guns, but those people who do have guns make me nervous and I don't want to piss them off_".


----------



## Eric

Herdfan said:


> No but since there is no real definition of assault weapon, I try not to use it.  To many people think AR stands for Assault Rifle.



When a person can walk into a classroom and pulverise dozens of kids into unrecognizable masses of meat so easily within minutes from a doorway, I say we constitute that as an assault weapon.


----------



## Yoused

A man in Michigan may have lost his right to "bear arms" after his house was shaken by a series of explosions of ammo and small explosives. He was apparently doing some thing with a bomb when bad stuff happened. The man had "an arsenal" to go along with his criminal record and was under investigation at the time.


----------



## DT

Yoused said:


> A man in Michigan may have lost his right to "bear arms" after his house was shaken by a series of explosions of ammo and small explosives. He was apparently doing some thing with a bomb when bad stuff happened. The man had "an arsenal" to go along with his criminal record and was under investigation at the time.




I'm a little disappointed your link text wasn't a pun, and the guy actually lost his ... well, you know ...


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Yoused said:


> I kind of wonder if there is a headspace like "_I don't have any guns, but those people who do have guns make me nervous and I don't want to piss them off_".




I think that sentiment applies to all the spineless Republican politicians towards Trump supporters on any legislation, not just gun control.


----------



## ronntaylor

Yoused said:


> A man in Michigan may have lost his right to "bear arms" after his house was shaken by a series of explosions of ammo and small explosives. He was apparently doing some thing with a bomb when bad stuff happened. The man had "an arsenal" to go along with his criminal record and was under investigation at the time.






> But the damage may be much worse, as The Detroit News reports that the man lost both arms in the explosion.






Let's hope the investigation continues and that if he was supplying guns, ammo or bombs to others, they're tracked down and forbidden to bear arms... like him.


----------



## Eric

Imagine if congress put the same effort into protecting children from mass shooting as they did protecting one SCOTUS justice from just the thought of it.


----------



## SuperMatt

Here’s the level of crazy we’re dealing with when it comes to Republicans and gun control:









						Group of Missouri Republican state lawmakers pushes Blunt to oppose Senate gun deal
					

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. — Four dozen Republican state lawmakers, including nine seeking higher office, want U.S. Sen. Roy Blunt to reverse his position and oppose the U.S. Senate gun control




					www.joplinglobe.com
				






> JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. — Four dozen Republican state lawmakers, including nine seeking higher office, want U.S. Sen. Roy Blunt to reverse his position and oppose the U.S. Senate gun control deal he helped negotiate.



It’s not surprising they oppose even the most minor of gun restrictions, but let’s get into their reasoning:



> The red flag law provisions have drawn attacks from gun rights groups and were the target of the letter from state Rep. Tony Lovasco, R-O’Fallon, and signed by 43 additional Missouri House members and four members of the state Senate.
> 
> In the letter, they noted that most versions of red flag laws authorize courts to seize guns from someone considered dangerous without requiring a criminal conviction and, in many cases, without the targeted person in court.
> 
> “The proposal in question seeks to allow Congress to deflect responsibility for enacting such horrid laws by essentially punting to the states,” the letter states. “Knowing that forcing such immoral and unconstitutional provisions nationwide would not garner enough votes to overcome a filibuster, Sen. (Chris) Murphy instead proposes to bribe states with their own tax money to do his dirty work for him.”




So, the bill doesn’t actually create a red flag law. But these politicians from Missouri oppose it because it might encourage OTHER states to create red flag laws.

So, basically nothing would change in Missouri, but they are pitching a hissy fit anyway! As usual, “States’ rights” is a load of  to be shoveled out of the barn only when convenient.

With such an extreme Republican Party, it’s no surprise that none of the 10 GOP Senators supporting this bill are up for re-election this cycle (Blunt from Missouri is retiring).


----------



## Yoused

Another day, another shooting.









						Vestavia Hills church shooting: 2 dead, 1 injured at St. Stephen’s Episcopal, shooter in custody
					

The incident happened during a “Boomers Potluck” dinner.




					www.al.com


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Yoused said:


> Another day, another shooting.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Vestavia Hills church shooting: 2 dead, 1 injured at St. Stephen’s Episcopal, shooter in custody
> 
> 
> The incident happened during a “Boomers Potluck” dinner.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.al.com




There was another "mass shooting" (by definition) in Oakland last night, 1 dead and 2 injured.  I don't think it was gang related.  Otherwise they most likely wouldn't have reported it the way they did....or possibly at all.

I realize gun violence has gone up, but I also think so has reporting on shootings, like a lot more on lesser by comparison shootings.  Like a shooting at a bar wouldn't have been reported nationally a few years ago because that's just what drunk people do in our country, not newsworthy.  Similar to what I said above in regards to perceived gang violence in Oakland.


----------



## Yoused

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> a shooting at a bar wouldn't have been reported nationally a few years ago because that's just what drunk people do in our country




At least on _Gunsmoke_ they take the shootout out in the street most times. Naturally shows like that (&, e.g., _Deathwish_ 1~37, and any Charles Norris/Steve Segal movie) are about Justice, not about gun violence.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Yoused said:


> At least on _Gunsmoke_ they take the shootout out in the street most times. Naturally shows like that (&, e.g., _Deathwish_ 1~37, and any Charles Norris/Steve Segal movie) are about Justice, not about gun violence.




It's pretty remarkable that according to one side the one thing that all instances of gun violence have in common is that it's not the gun.


----------



## DT

I was coming back from a supply run, behind a JGC with a sticker with an AR-15-like firearm, and the caption was, "We don't call 911" ...

I was thinking, yeah, good idea, those fuckers don't do anything except stand around hassling parents.


----------



## Yoused

DT said:


> "We don't call 911"



_Grandpa's having a heart attack!_

_We don't call 911 – let me look up how they handle sick horses …_


----------



## DT

Yoused said:


> _Grandpa's having a heart attack!
> 
> We don't call 911 – let me look up how they handle sick horses …_




Hahahaha, JFC!  I guess they just smoke grandpa and toss him in the landfill.

I got another good video too, some idiot with F*** Biden flags and stickers, what a pathetic piece of shit that guy must be, can you image that being your life?


----------



## SuperMatt

Yoused said:


> Another day, another shooting.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Vestavia Hills church shooting: 2 dead, 1 injured at St. Stephen’s Episcopal, shooter in custody
> 
> 
> The incident happened during a “Boomers Potluck” dinner.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.al.com



Sadly, 3 ended up dying.

Kay Ivey, the state’s governor said:



> On Thursday night, Gov. Kay Ivey of Alabama called the shooting “a tragic loss of life.”
> 
> “This should never happen — in a church, in a store, in the city or anywhere,” she said.




This was Kay Ivey a couple months ago:



			Controversial permitless gun carry bill signed by Gov. Kay Ivey
		


We need more gun control, not less.


----------



## Yoused

Not sure what thread this belongs in, but guns are involved, and Vermont is the 2Aest state in the country









						Vt. Man Arrested For Threatening Daughter’s School Over Trans People
					

Shane Gobeil reportedly told police that he intended to buy an assault rifle and if anyone trans or in drag came near his daughter he'd "kill 'em."




					www.advocate.com


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Some facts mentioned on a recent The Lever podcast.  The Lever site and podcast is dedicated to corruption and following the money.

Presidents Ford, Reagan, and Carter pushed the assault weapons ban and Clinton passed it.  Not exactly a partisan view prior to recently.  By the numbers this reduced mass shootings.  After the ban expired mass shootings tripled.

About 15 yeas ago California, Texas, and Florida had about the same rate of gun deaths.  California gun deaths went down by 10% since passing stricter gun legislation.  During the same period Florida and Texas loosened their restrictions and their gun death rates went up by  28% and 38%

Mass shootings have repeatedly caused Republicans to make the situation worse and Democrats to do nothing.  A recent Harvard UCLA study concluded the number of laws loosening gun restrictions doubles in the year following a mass shooting when there are Repiublican controlled legislatures.  When there is a Democrat legislature no significant gun legislation is enacted.    

With everything the government is doing or not doing on this and so many other issues its starting to remind me of the scene in Office Space where Milton got fired but nobody told and him and due to an accounting glitch he continued to get paychecks and therefor show up to work.  To remedy that situation they still didn't tell him but fixed the accounting glitch so he would stop getting checks and get the hint.  Our government is 100% beholden to special interests and for the rest of us they fixed the accounting glitch.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Not a fan of our governor on a lot of things, but nice one on this.

Also a lot of info in the video showing Republican lead states and Republican lead cities within Democrat states have higher murder rates.  But yeah, I'll give it to the rubes when they base it entirely on exact numbers when comparing CA with a population of 40,000,000 and Wyoming with a population of 12.  By that standard CA is a death trap soon as you enter.


----------



## AG_PhamD

Just an update on the Uvalde situation. 

Apparently in that hour+ period police spent allegedly waiting for equipment to open the door or get keys… whatever the story is, it turns out the classroom door may have been unlocked the entire time.  









						Bettencourt: Uvalde classroom door unlocked during rampage; law enforcement didn’t try to see if it would open
					

On Monday, <a href="https://www.click2houston.com/news/investigates/2022/06/17/witnesses-testify-behind-closed-doors-in-uvalde-mass-shooting-probe/" target="_blank">the state House committee investigating the response to the mass murders at Robb Elementary</a> will hear testimony from responding...




					www.click2houston.com
				




The police are also refusing to turn over the body cam footage. I understand not releasing some of it, but certainly much of it probably does not display anything too sensitive for public consumption. And if it does, images could be censored. We have the technology. I thought the point of these body cams in the first place were to hold the police accountable.


----------



## JayMysteri0

If you ever wanted an example of how hollow the claims about concern for mental health is ( only after a shooting it always seems ), look no further to Abbot & Texas.  AFTER a shooting...



> A 24/7 hotline meant to support Uvalde left one woman confused — and concerned for survivors
> 
> 
> “There’s not enough of us to go around,” said therapist Jaclyn Gonzalez, who has been providing services to families after the school shooting.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nbcnews.com






> Days after the May 24 shooting, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott promised an "abundance of mental health services" to help "anyone in the community who needs it ... the totality of anyone who lives in this community." He said the services would be free. "We just want you to ask for them," he said, before giving out the 24/7 hotline number — 888-690-0799.
> 
> That's a tall order for a community in an area with a shortage of mental health resources, in a state that ranks last for overall access to mental health care, according to a 2022 State of Mental Health in America report.
> 
> Mental health organizations are assembling a collection of services to assist those who seek help in Uvalde. But there have been hiccups and hitches along the way.
> 
> There is worry that what's being offered is not coming together as fast or efficiently as it could be, and that it's being assembled without keeping in mind the community it serves: Many residents are lower income, and some may have difficulties with transportation, or are mainly Hispanic. Many are not accustomed to seeking out therapy, or are distrustful of who is providing it.




There wasn't the resources before, so how is it expected for there to be resources afterwards.



AG_PhamD said:


> Just an update on the Uvalde situation.
> 
> Apparently in that hour+ period police spent allegedly waiting for equipment to open the door or get keys… whatever the story is, it turns out the classroom door may have been unlocked the entire time.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bettencourt: Uvalde classroom door unlocked during rampage; law enforcement didn’t try to see if it would open
> 
> 
> On Monday, <a href="https://www.click2houston.com/news/investigates/2022/06/17/witnesses-testify-behind-closed-doors-in-uvalde-mass-shooting-probe/" target="_blank">the state House committee investigating the response to the mass murders at Robb Elementary</a> will hear testimony from responding...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.click2houston.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The police are also refusing to turn over the body cam footage. I understand not releasing some of it, but certainly much of it probably does not display anything too sensitive for public consumption. And if it does, images could be censored. We have the technology. I thought the point of these body cams in the first place were to hold the police accountable.



If that's true, it makes the Uvalde police look even worse.

No wonder all footage of the incident is being kept from the public.

If only that fabled ONE good guy with a gun had been there, instead of "a team of Uvalde police officers and school district officers".


----------



## SuperMatt

JayMysteri0 said:


> If you ever wanted an example of how hollow the claims about concern for mental health is ( only after a shooting it always seems ), look no further to Abbot & Texas.  AFTER a shooting...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There wasn't the resources before, so how is it expected for there to be resources afterwards.
> 
> 
> If that's true, it makes the Uvalde police look even worse.
> 
> No wonder all footage of the incident is being kept from the public.
> 
> If only that fabled ONE good guy with a gun had been there, instead of "a team of Uvalde police officers and school district officers".



Last year about this time, Governor Abbott called a special legislative session. What was the emergency that required a special session?

Among a couple other things: Transgender kids in sports, CRT, making sure domestic violence teaching in school is opt-out for parents, social media censorship, and blocking abortion drugs.









						Governor Abbott Announces Special Session Agenda
					






					gov.texas.gov
				




In wake of the Uvalde shooting, despite the thoughts, prayers, and pledges for mental health improvements, Abbott is NOT supporting a special legislative session requested by Democrats.

Let that sink in. Right-wingers getting ”censored” on social media = an emergency. Kids getting gunned down in school:


----------



## JayMysteri0

This is not inspiring confidence 

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1538904580137820160/


----------



## Citysnaps

*Dead school children have become an acceptable consequence of no-limitations gun ownership.*

That needs to be publicly driven home every single day.


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1539005390108622849/
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1539005393216622594/

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1539029296664150026/



> Uvalde School Security Cam Reveals Cops Had High-Powered Rifles
> 
> 
> Shots could be heard at 11:40 a.m., 11:44 a.m., and 12:21 p.m., but the cops didn't budge.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gizmodo.com





> Security camera images leaked from inside Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas, where a mass shooting took place on May 24, reveal police officers were present with high powered rifles and ballistic shields, but stood around for over an hour, as 19 young students and two teachers were slaughtered. The two still images, captured from security cameras in the school, are just the latest pieces of evidence that directly contradict the official narrative provided by police shortly after the massacre.
> 
> The two images were leaked to local Texas TV station KVUE, the Austin-American Statesman, and the Texas Tribune, which have been able to assemble detailed timelines of police activity, or inactivity, during the mass shooting. KVUE reports the station was able to view the security camera footage but does not currently have possession of the video.
> 
> The KVUE reporter who saw the footage strongly hinted on his Monday night broadcast that someone helping to conduct the current investigation into the shooting allowed reporters to view the security camera footage in its entirety, which clearly shows cops just waiting around after they drew fire from the shooter. Numerous news outlets have been denied official access to the footage through public records requests.
> 
> Last night’s segment from KVUE, which is available on YouTube, includes an image that’s time-stamped from security cameras at 11:52 a.m. local time, as you can see in the screenshot above. You can also see the officers standing still and even just leaning against the wall, something they did for over an hour. The shooter first entered the school at 11:33 a.m., according to the Austin-American Statesman.





> The image published by the Texas Tribune does not show the time-stamp but the news outlet reports it was taken at 12:04 p.m. local time. The Tribune reports that, according to the footage, police did not even try to open the doors to the classrooms, contradicting the version of events first told by police. The news outlet notes, “some law enforcement officials are skeptical that the doors were ever locked.”
> 
> The Tribune includes a detailed timeline, taken from the security camera footage as well as transcripts of police radio chatter. And after the gunman first fired shots at police, the Tribune reports gunfire could be heard at least three more times, at 11:40 a.m., 11:44 a.m., and 12:21 p.m., local time. The police didn’t budge, despite hearing those shots.
> 
> Police didn’t actually storm the classroom until 12:50 p.m., according to the Tribune. Parents waiting outside heard gunshots while desperately trying to get to their children during that agonizing hour.
> 
> There’s no word on whether the security camera footage will ever be released publicly, but that seems unlikely since the Tribune reports it includes footage of dead children being moved out into the hallway:


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1539069000944078850/

What I have believed from the beginning
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1539269689599266817/



> Texas DPS: Uvalde Police Could've Ended School Shooting Rampage Early on
> 
> 
> The Texas public safety chief testified Tuesday, condemning the police response as an “abject failure.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nbcdfw.com





> *Law enforcement authorities had enough officers on the scene of the Uvalde school massacre to stop the gunman three minutes after he entered the building, the Texas public safety chief testified Tuesday, condemning the police response as an "abject failure."*
> 
> Police officers with rifles instead stood and waited in a school hallway for nearly an hour while the gunman carried out the May 24 attack that left 19 children and two teachers dead.
> 
> Col. Steve McCraw, director of the Texas Department of Public Safety, testified at a state Senate hearing on the police handling of the tragedy.
> 
> Delays in the law enforcement response have been the focus of federal, state and local investigations of the mass shooting.
> 
> McCraw told the Senate committee that Pete Arredondo, the Uvalde school district police chief, decided to put the lives of officers ahead of the lives of children.
> 
> The public safety chief began outlining for the committee a series of missed opportunities.




https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1539290916359380992/
FFS


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1539218382561718272/


----------



## SuperMatt

JayMysteri0 said:


> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1539218382561718272/



The interview with the District Attorney was very interesting. He and all the police seem very upset about these open carry laws because they don’t know what to do. If they arrest the person, they could get sued for false arrest, or the person could open fire, since he outguns most officers.

It’s absolutely f-ed up!!!!


----------



## SuperMatt

JayMysteri0 said:


> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1539069000944078850/
> 
> What I have believed from the beginning
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1539269689599266817/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1539290916359380992/
> FFS



The doors are designed to be un-lockable from the inside. So there’s no way it could be locked, information that you’d think the school’s own police department would KNOW. And not a single officer even TRIED the door.

NINE officers just outside the door within 3 minutes of it starting, with rifles, pistols, and body armor. And they didn’t do ANYTHING for AN HOUR?????

The police aren’t going to save us; the Supreme Court, as @JayMysteri0 pointed out, says the cops don’t need to protect anybody, even if the law requires them to. We need to get rid of the guns, period.


----------



## Yoused

SuperMatt said:


> NINE officers just outside the door within 3 minutes of it starting, with rifles, pistols, and body armor. And they didn’t do ANYTHING for AN HOUR?????




To be completely fair (I try to be fair even when I would rather not), most of the killing occurred before the blueliners arrived on the scene. Delays by the police may have resulted in maybe a couple more lives being lost, or perhaps none. At least one student used a classmate's blood to make herself look killed. By the time the police arrived, the shooting was nearly over.


----------



## Herdfan

Yoused said:


> To be completely fair (I try to be fair even when I would rather not), most of the killing occurred before the blueliners arrived on the scene. Delays by the police may have resulted in maybe a couple more lives being lost, or perhaps none. At least one student used a classmate's blood to make herself look killed. By the time the police arrived, the shooting was nearly over.




I will say most of the shooting occurred before they arrived.  Who knows how many might have been able to be saved had they received prompt medical care.


----------



## SuperMatt

Yoused said:


> To be completely fair (I try to be fair even when I would rather not), most of the killing occurred before the blueliners arrived on the scene. Delays by the police may have resulted in maybe a couple more lives being lost, or perhaps none. At least one student used a classmate's blood to make herself look killed. By the time the police arrived, the shooting was nearly over.



How did they know he wouldn’t start shooting again? How could they just stand there with bleeding kids a few feet away? How long did that kid have to lie in a pool of her friends’ blood because they failed so miserably? 

And another thing, if the shooting killed 21 people and only took 3 minutes… what more argument do people need that semi-auto weapons need to be banned forever?!?!

Nobody should be excusing these police or the Republican Party for its constant blocking of gun reform.

No excuses. Because when you try to be “fair” to the NRA and its minions, and to these police, you are being UNFAIR to the victims.


----------



## Cmaier

SuperMatt said:


> How did they know he wouldn’t start shooting again? How could they just stand there with bleeding kids a few feet away? How long did that kid have to lie in a pool of her friends’ blood because they failed so miserably?
> 
> And another thing, if the shooting killed 21 people and only took 3 minutes… what more argument do people need that semi-auto weapons need to be banned forever?!?!
> 
> Nobody should be excusing these police or the Republican Party for its constant blocking of gun reform.
> 
> No excuses. Because when you try to be “fair” to the NRA and its minions, and to these police, you are being UNFAIR to the victims.



My understanding is that some victims died in the ambulance on the way to the hospital.  I find it hard to believe they wouldn’t have been much better off if they had gotten to the hospital an hour earlier.


----------



## Yoused

SuperMatt said:


> And another thing, if the shooting killed 21 people and only took 3 minutes… what more argument do people need that semi-auto weapons need to be banned forever?!?!




Well, and *this is the point* here. The police response is a distraction from what really matters. Guy buys automatic weapons _on spec_, goes out a day or two later and commits mayhem and slaughter. And a bipartisan group of Senators puts forth a piece of totally worthless theater legislation that will accomplish worse than nothing because people will feel like something is being done when in the end nothing is being done.


----------



## Yoused

JayMysteri0 said:


> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1539218382561718272/



On that, it appears that the man _was_ ultimately arrested – for brass knuckes


----------



## Yoused

Remember that church potluck shooting recently in Alabama?

*(Accused shooter Robert Findlay) Smith lives near Cahaba Heights and police blocked off his roadway for much of Friday afternoon while they carried out a search warrant at his Sicard Hollow home. Public records show Smith is an ATF licensed firearms dealer, with a business called Original Magazines 2 at 4128 Sicard Hollow Road, which is also his home address.*​
I mean, he might lose his license over this, but then again, the way things have been going lately, probably not.


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1539412752338505736/
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1539413712255209472/
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1539413809185562624/

There is no "to be fair here".  There are multiple aspects of this.  A young man was allowed to buy weapons upon turning 18, with credit, and no problem.  Young man with said weapons that weren't needed goes on to kill adults & children.  The narrative that leadership of this state  likes that this happened in, is that with MORE guns & a good guy shit like this won't happen.  At least 9 or more ( depending on who & when the story is told ) professional good guyS with guns understandably did NOT want to contend with young man with recently purchased powerful weapons.  When there was a chance to contend with the situation in the first few minutes, out of concern for their own lives, the situation was instead dealt with almost an hour later, by ANOTHER group of professional good guys with guns.

In the aftermath, the leadership decided to create various fictions of what happened, to preserve narratives.  Doors were blamed, teachers were blamed.  Not the guns.  Not the professional good guys with guns.

The fuckery here is multiple.  Narratives were shown to be marketing jargon.

Easy access to weapons allowed this to happen.  Professionals kitted with even more weapons & gear couldn't & wouldn't stop this from happening.

What Uvalde showed is that this isn't a one issue thing.  It's a series of issues that the leadership of Texas does not want to and will not contend with.  Instead hoping if they bullshit long enough either the public will forget or God forbid another worse shooting happens to take up the conversation.  The ease of acquiring guns needs to be protected more than the lives that will be lost by guns.  The employment of those charged with ( or not depending on who you ask ) protecting lives is more important, than the accountability for NOT protecting lives.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1539298010198380544/


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

The narrative is now shifting to legally the police don’t have to do a damn thing, another of the many loopholes or oversights that have been revealed by the Trump era where the only sane response should be “Are you fucking serious?”. So this announces to the country including the police that when faced with a similar scenario the extreme possible outcomes are either being killed or being fired or forced to resign. So would you rather be dead or unemployed?

So what’s the solution? More good guys with guns to potentially take out bad guys with guns while completely ignoring the fact this solution includes arming more bad guys and creating more confrontations between the police and good guys with guns against bad guys with guns. There aren't a lot of stories in the news about good guys with guns taking out bad guys with guns. So I guess we need to create more of those situations.

The rot in the US is incomprehensible and one side wants to turn the entire country into a free-range asylum where all the lunatics are armed. At minimum the government should at least create the illusion of safety and stability and they can’t even do that. The Republican party not only wants to shatter that illusion but also wants to actively make it worse.


----------



## Cmaier




----------



## Joe

lol, this country is so fucked.


----------



## JayMysteri0

Joe said:


> lol, this country is so fucked.




As @Yoused pointed out yesterday when we were discussing this, he actually got busted for of all things brass knuckles.

Reminding us again about this country's f'ed up priorities.


----------



## SuperMatt

Yoused said:


> Remember that church potluck shooting recently in Alabama?
> 
> *(Accused shooter Robert Findlay) Smith lives near Cahaba Heights and police blocked off his roadway for much of Friday afternoon while they carried out a search warrant at his Sicard Hollow home. Public records show Smith is an ATF licensed firearms dealer, with a business called Original Magazines 2 at 4128 Sicard Hollow Road, which is also his home address.*​
> I mean, he might lose his license over this, but then again, the way things have been going lately, probably not.



He can claim his legal expenses as a business expense. After all, gun sales go up after every mass shooting. He was just trying to drum up some business. Oh well, some people died. Who cares? That’s just how it goes in the good ol’ US of A!


----------



## Eric

Uvalde police assisting the shooter. They better drop the hammer on these worthless cops.


At this point we have to assume the Uvalde police department was in it with the shooter (half sarcasm?) from
      WhitePeopleTwitter


----------



## SuperMatt

The Supreme Court has decided to expand on Scalia’s terrible _Heller_ decision by telling states what kinds of regulations they can or cannot impose on guns.

This will lead to more guns and more gun deaths.

I just want to point out that the current crop of right-wing judges claim to focus on the original text of the Constitution. But when it comes to the 2nd amendment, they ignore the first part of it entirely, and they insert the right of self-defense which is NOT in the Constitution. The whole “originalism” nonsense was nothing but a pose, and a convenient way to focus on a word here and a word there in order to force a radical ideology on America.

This is extreme “judicial activism” which they all claimed to oppose … until they got a majority and decided to overrule law after law after law based on an unpopular ideology.


----------



## Joe

I am fine with concealed carry. I don't understand the people walking around like they're rambo. Seek some mental help. Those are the people I stay far away from.


----------



## Huntn

SuperMatt said:


> The Supreme Court has decided to expand on Scalia’s terrible _Heller_ decision by telling states what kinds of regulations they can or cannot impose on guns.
> 
> This will lead to more guns and more gun deaths.
> 
> I just want to point out that the current crop of right-wing judges claim to focus on the original text of the Constitution. But when it comes to the 2nd amendment, they ignore the first part of it entirely, and they insert the right of self-defense which is NOT in the Constitution. The whole “originalism” nonsense was nothing but a pose, and a convenient way to focus on a word here and a word there in order to force a radical ideology on America.
> 
> This is extreme “judicial activism” which they all claimed to oppose … until they got a majority and decided to overrule law after law after law based on an unpopular ideology.



Not funny how conservatives scream about States Rights, until it has to do with guns and abortion.


----------



## Citysnaps

Feeling a bit on edge riding a NYC subway car? No worries, mate. Conceal carry your own gun along with the other 100+ untrained gun carrying riders in your car and you'll be ready for any situation. 

What could go wrong?


----------



## Huntn

citypix said:


> Feeling a bit on edge riding a NYC subway car? No worries, mate. Conceal carry your own gun along with the other 100+ untrained gun carrying riders in your car and you'll be ready for any situation.
> 
> What could go wrong?



And when you accidentily shoot some innocent bystander, the jury of gun owners will let you off for a regrettable, (bonus thoughts and prayers), but justifiable under the circumstances collateral damage, then give you a medal.


----------



## Cmaier

citypix said:


> Feeling a bit on edge riding a NYC subway car? No worries, mate. Conceal carry your own gun along with the other 100+ untrained gun carrying riders in your car and you'll be ready for any situation.
> 
> What could go wrong?




The MTA is a public benefit corporation, so maybe they can ban guns if they want.  At least it would probably take a few years before the SCOTUS gets the case in front of it to declare that such corporations can’t.  (I could be wrong - there may already be a case that deals with whether a public benefit corporation is a government entity for such purposes)


----------



## Cmaier

Huntn said:


> And when you accidentily shoot some innocent bystander, the jury of gun owners will let you off for a regrettable, (bonus thoughts and prayers), but justifiable under the circumstances collateral damage, then give you a medal.




Solution to that is the texas abortion snitch law.  “You see someone get shot or even threaten someone with a gun? You can sue the gun manufacturer for a million dollars”.


----------



## Citysnaps

Cmaier said:


> The MTA is a public benefit corporation, so maybe they can ban guns if they want.




Curious... what is a public benefit corporation? An entity that is supervised under a city charter? Or would that include private entities like shopping malls, theaters, churches/synagogues, night clubs, music venues, etc?


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

SuperMatt said:


> The Supreme Court has decided to expand on Scalia’s terrible _Heller_ decision by telling states what kinds of regulations they can or cannot impose on guns.
> 
> This will lead to more guns and more gun deaths.
> 
> I just want to point out that the current crop of right-wing judges claim to focus on the original text of the Constitution. But when it comes to the 2nd amendment, they ignore the first part of it entirely, and they insert the right of self-defense which is NOT in the Constitution. The whole “originalism” nonsense was nothing but a pose, and a convenient way to focus on a word here and a word there in order to force a radical ideology on America.
> 
> This is extreme “judicial activism” which they all claimed to oppose … until they got a majority and decided to overrule law after law after law based on an unpopular ideology.




Originalists should be banned from the supreme court.  If you believe society hasn't evolved in over 200 years then you are absolutely disqualified.


----------



## SuperMatt

Cmaier said:


> The MTA is a public benefit corporation, so maybe they can ban guns if they want.  At least it would probably take a few years before the SCOTUS gets the case in front of it to declare that such corporations can’t.  (I could be wrong - there may already be a case that deals with whether a public benefit corporation is a government entity for such purposes)



They just have to say that allowing guns violates the corporation’s deeply held religious beliefs. Now THERE would be a conundrum for this Supreme Court. Which of their made-up rights do they value more? A corporation’s religious right or gun rights completely divorced from a well-regulated militia?


----------



## ronntaylor

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1539990558424399875/


----------



## SuperMatt

I recommend that people read the opinion. It permanently puts to bed any notion that this court cares about “original text” in any way. Instead, they rely on, in Thomas’ words: "The government must demonstrate that the regulation is consistent with *this nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation*."

That could literally mean anything you want it to. What history? What states? What kinds of guns? How far back in history? This is the ultimate in subjective, arbitrary reasoning.

And the original premise of the opinion is: "New York’s proper-cause requirement violates the Fourteenth Amendment by preventing law-abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their *Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms in public for self-defense.*"

Sorry - the 2nd amendment doesn’t say “in public” and it doesn’t say “for self-defense.” Justice Thomas put all that in there himself. Here’s what it really 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.




This court cut up the constitution and glued it back together, inserting their own text all over it.

This is what America gets for voting for Trump. This shame will be with us for multiple decades now.





__





						Loading…
					





					www.supremecourt.gov
				




PS - It’s pretty f-ing rich to invoke the 14th amendment after they destroyed the voting rights act.

PPS - They still support passing laws preventing people from threatening SCOTUS justices from guns! Can we carry AR-15s into the Supreme Court now? If not, why not????


----------



## SuperMatt

Sorry for all the posts, but I wanted to point out one more massive piece of bullshit from Thomas. He quotes _Heller_ to prove a point, but watch what he does...



> The Second Amendment “is the very product of an interest balancing by the people,” and it “surely elevates above all other interests the right of law-abiding, responsible citizens to use arms” for self-defense. Heller, 554 U. S., at 635. Pp. 15–17.




Look carefully: the part that says self defense is OUTSIDE THE QUOTE. Again, he added that shit himself!!! This is just utter and complete nonsense.


----------



## Eric

SCOTUS made a calculated decision that not enough children are being massacred.


----------



## SuperMatt

Eric said:


> SCOTUS made a calculated decision that not enough children are being massacred.



Since they’re making abortion illegal, and they consider fetuses equal to children, gotta make up the difference somehow. Let them be born, then gun them down.


----------



## Herdfan

Joe said:


> I am fine with concealed carry. I don't understand the people walking around like they're rambo. Seek some mental help. Those are the people I stay far away from.




Exactly.  I rarely carry in public (there is one in my truck locked in a console vault) but when I do, unless you knew, you would never know.


----------



## Herdfan

Huntn said:


> Not funny how conservatives scream about States Rights, until it has to do with guns and abortion.




I believe if RvW is overturned, it will give the rights back to the states.  So not sure I understand your position.

As for guns, that is a Federal right in the Constitution.  Not really sure how the states were allowed to get involved in the first place.


----------



## SuperMatt

If this is how this court interprets the 2nd amendment, pack the court. Or, to borrow a phrase from the Tea Party: “Repeal and Replace” the amendment.

The more I read this opinion, the more I realize Thomas and Alito (and Scalia before them) are amateur historians trying to use their view of history to impose centuries-old ideas upon America. Why couldn’t they just channel their historical fantasies into Civil War reenactments on the weekends or something?

Using the “history of firearms regulation“ as a reason to invalidate a 100-year old law is just plain laughable. This law is LITERALLY historic firearms regulation. Justice Breyer’s dissent just plain nails Thomas and Alito to the wall, exposing their flawed reasoning for what it is: selective bits of ”history” masquerading as legal precedent.


----------



## Huntn

Herdfan said:


> I believe if RvW is overturned, it will give the rights back to the states.  So not sure I understand your position.
> 
> As for guns, that is a Federal right in the Constitution.  Not really sure how the states were allowed to get involved in the first place.



Buzzer sound… SCOTUS overturned a New York State gun control Law.


----------



## Herdfan

Huntn said:


> Buzzer sound… SCOTUS overturned a New York State gun control Law.




The Constitution, specifically the 10A which says:



> The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.




So in this case, the right to bear arms is a Federal right protected by the 2A.  It is a right delegated to the people and the states never should have been allowed to get involved.  NY did and SCOTUS told them No.


----------



## GermanSuplex

That's ok, all of our republican friends will join in on the calls for curbing weapon glorification and lax gun laws once they and their families start seeing armed men walking down the streets in their neighborhoods.

This is somehow tied to a white supremacy fantasy - do the people advocating for everyone open carrying or concealed carry (and how do you conceal carry a rifle?) think its just going to be them walking the streets and grocery store aisles with weapons? Are they ok with people who don't match their skin shade doing the same? I sure hope so.

All I'm going to do is sit back and enjoy the entertainment, and try my best to stay out of it.


----------



## SuperMatt

Herdfan said:


> The Constitution, specifically the 10A which says:
> 
> 
> 
> So in this case, the right to bear arms is a Federal right protected by the 2A.  It is a right delegated to the people and the states never should have been allowed to get involved.  NY did and SCOTUS told them No.



You actually may have gotten this backwards…









						SCOTUS Is Violating the 10th Amendment by Not Letting States Enact Gun Control
					

The Supreme Court’s legal doctrine on gun rights makes it complicit in the U.S.’s crisis of gun violence.




					truthout.org
				






> Before the court’s 2010 decision in McDonald, settled constitutional law established that the Second Amendment right to bear arms was not a “fundamental” right and therefore the Second Amendment did not impose constitutional constraints on state and local governments. McDonald rejected two centuries of consistent precedent by holding that the Second Amendment imposes legally binding limits on state governments.




And SCOTUS didn’t “told them No” in any way. This law had been in place before anybody on the court was even born. So who are they telling “No” to?

This court is so full of it. They overturn 200 years of precedent allowing for states to regulate firearms, and then invoke “history” as their reasoning.

Force states to give money to religious organizations, tell them they cannot regulate guns, but if they want to restrict voting? Hey, that’s A-OK! Nobody can honestly believe there is a judicial philosophy here. It is pure ideology, picking and choosing the “judicial philosophy“ that gets them the ideological result they want in any particular case.


----------



## Herdfan

SuperMatt said:


> You actually may have gotten this backwards…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SCOTUS Is Violating the 10th Amendment by Not Letting States Enact Gun Control
> 
> 
> The Supreme Court’s legal doctrine on gun rights makes it complicit in the U.S.’s crisis of gun violence.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> truthout.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And SCOTUS didn’t “told them No” in any way. This law had been in place before anybody on the court was even born. So who are they telling “No” to?
> 
> This court is so full of it. They overturn 200 years of precedent allowing for states to regulate firearms, and then invoke “history” as their reasoning.
> 
> Force states to give money to religious organizations, tell them they cannot regulate guns, but if they want to restrict voting? Hey, that’s A-OK! Nobody can honestly believe there is a judicial philosophy here. It is pure ideology, picking and choosing the “judicial philosophy“ that gets them the ideological result they want in any particular case.




Got to push back here a bit.

Just because it lasted 200 years doesn't mean it was right in the first place.  Remember, Dred Scot was overturned so right is right and wrong is wrong regardless of time passed.  The states never should have been allowed to regulate guns in the first place, so that is on those who lived them to not stop it.

Please tell me how states are forced to give money to religious organizations.  If you are referring to the Maine decision, that idea to use a phrase you like to use, has already been debunked.


----------



## SuperMatt

Herdfan said:


> Got to push back here a bit.
> 
> Just because it lasted 200 years doesn't mean it was right in the first place.  Remember, Dred Scot was overturned so right is right and wrong is wrong regardless of time passed.  The states never should have been allowed to regulate guns in the first place, so that is on those who lived them to not stop it.
> 
> Please tell me how states are forced to give money to religious organizations.  If you are referring to the Maine decision, that idea to use a phrase you like to use, has already been debunked.



Again, the SCOTUS’ reason for overturning the law was “historical firearm regulation” but they used that to literally overturn 200 years of precedent. The opposite of history. If they wanted to toss out some other reason for the overturning of the law, I’d like to see it. But using history as a justification to overturn 200 years of historical precedent is truly absurd.

As I said before, they already made up their minds based on an ideology of maximally permissive gun laws. Historically that has NOT been the case in America, as 200 years of precedent show. But they CLAIM history is their reason (since the amendment itself never mentions self defense ). Stephen Breyer did a way better job of exposing their BS than I can, so feel free to read his dissent. If you want to read an amateur historian’s absurdist view of history, you can read Thomas’ opinion too.  Gotta love how he goes back hundreds of years to Europe before guns even existed... Just so unbelievable to see that in an actual Supreme Court opinion.


----------



## SuperMatt

Herdfan said:


> Please tell me how states are forced to give money to religious organizations. If you are referring to the Maine decision, that idea to use a phrase you like to use, has already been debunked.



I don’t understand what you are saying. If you’re going to “debunk” something then do so. Provide a link or explain it yourself.


----------



## Herdfan

SuperMatt said:


> I don’t understand what you are saying. If you’re going to “debunk” something then do so. Provide a link or explain it yourself.




SCOTUS said that if you are going to provide tuition assistance, you can't discriminate.  They are not forced (your word) to do anything.  Just if they are going to do it, they can't discriminate between type of schools.  Maine is free to stop the tuition assistance program any time they please.



SuperMatt said:


> Again, the SCOTUS’ reason for overturning the law was “historical firearm regulation” but they used that to literally overturn 200 years of precedent. The opposite of history. If they wanted to toss out some other reason for the overturning of the law, I’d like to see it. But using history as a justification to overturn 200 years of historical precedent is truly absurd.
> 
> As I said before, they already made up their minds based on an ideology of maximally permissive gun laws. Historically that has NOT been the case in America, as 200 years of precedent show. But they CLAIM history is their reason (since the amendment itself never mentions self defense ). Stephen Breyer did a way better job of exposing their BS than I can, so feel free to read his dissent. If you want to read an amateur historian’s absurdist view of history, you can read Thomas’ opinion too.  Gotta love how he goes back hundreds of years to Europe before guns even existed... Just so unbelievable to see that in an actual Supreme Court opinion.




Should Dred Scot not been overturned because we had hundreds of years of history doing it the other way?  Legally? 

Bad decisions need to be fixed regardless of the passage of time.


----------



## LIVEFRMNYC

I'm happy about this decision.  As a permit holder in NYC, I shouldn't have to be regulated to only have protection within my home.  Not that I plan to conceal carry often, but there are times and places when I feel safer to do such.   And this is especially a right you want to have as you get older.  

Besides the minority of possible incidents, I personally don't think this will change much of anything.  I don't think it's going to deter or increase violent crimes in any noticeable way.


----------



## SuperMatt

Herdfan said:


> Should Dred Scot not been overturned because we had hundreds of years of history doing it the other way? Legally?
> 
> Bad decisions need to be fixed regardless of the passage of time.




I said REPEATEDLY that using “historical firearms laws” as a justification for overturning a 100-year old firearms law doesn’t make any fucking sense. I am saying that his REASONING is flawed. None of your responses have even tried to rebut that, just insisting that somehow the ruling is bad, because... well you just think it’s bad. No other reason given. If Thomas gave some other reasoning, then let’s discuss that. But the “history” reasoning is bullshit, pure and simple. I was glad to see that when I read the Breyer dissent, he came to the same conclusion, but much more eloquently said than I.

And do you really want to be “that guy” who conflates gun permit laws to slavery? A state limiting your ability to carry assault weapons with you everywhere you go is JUST LIKE being a slave!



Herdfan said:


> SCOTUS said that if you are going to provide tuition assistance, you can't discriminate. They are not forced (your word) to do anything. Just if they are going to do it, they can't discriminate between type of schools. Maine is free to stop the tuition assistance program any time they please.




Let’s look at this practically: they are only “forced” to pay to religious schools IF they give money to any private schools at all. Which leaves a choice - end all private school funding or you MUST give money to religious schools. 

This _de facto_ *forces* Maine to pay the religious schools. Why? In the opinion itself, you can see that Maine's constitution *requires* them to provide public education. It also states that many areas of the state do NOT have public schools, so the only feasible solution was to give money for kids to attend private schools. Even if Maine wanted to end all funding of private schools immediately, their state constitution would not allow it because even if they wanted to build public schools to accommodate those kids, it would take time and money... so at least until they could accomplish that, they literally ARE forced to pay money to religious schools, at least as a stopgap until they can build more schools... which could be many years. So, yes, they are being FORCED to pay by the coming together of their state constitution and this SCOTUS ruling.


----------



## SuperMatt

LIVEFRMNYC said:


> I'm happy about this decision.  As a permit holder in NYC, I shouldn't have to be regulated to only have protection within my home.  Not that I plan to conceal carry often, but there are times and places when I feel safer to do such.   And this is especially a right you want to have as you get older.
> 
> Besides the minority of possible incidents, I personally don't think this will change much of anything.  I don't think it's going to deter or increase violent crimes in any noticeable way.




I understand you think it may not change much. However, the statistics in states with laws similar to NY’s as opposed to those without them is telling. Here’s what Justice Breyer had to say:



> In particular, studies have shown that “may issue” licensing regimes, like New York’s, are associ- ated with lower homicide rates and lower violent crime rates than “shall issue” licensing regimes. For example, one study compared homicide rates across all 50 States during
> 
> the 25-year period from 1991 to 2015 and found that “shall issue” laws were associated with 6.5% higher total homicide rates, 8.6% higher firearm homicide rates, and 10.6% higher handgun homicide rates. Siegel, 107 Am. J. Pub. Health, at 1924–1925, 1927. Another study longitudinally followed 33 States that had adopted “shall-issue” laws be- tween 1981 and 2007 and found that the adoption of those laws was associated with a 13%–15% increase in rates of violent crime after 10 years. Donohue, 16 J. Empirical Le- gal Studies, at 200, 240. Numerous other studies show sim- ilar results. See, e.g., Siegel, 36 J. Rural Health, at 261 (finding that “may issue” laws are associated with 17% lower firearm homicide rates in large cities); C. Crifasi et al., Association Between Firearm Laws and Homicide in Urban Counties, 95 J. Urb. Health 383, 387 (2018) (finding that “shall issue” laws are associated with a 4% increase in firearm homicide rates in urban counties); M. Doucette, C. Crifasi, & S. Frattaroli, Right-to-Carry Laws and Firearm Workplace Homicides: A Longitudinal Analysis (1992– 2017), 109 Am. J. Pub. Health 1747, 1751 (Dec. 2019) (find- ing that States with “shall issue” laws between 1992 and 2017 experienced 29% higher rates of firearm-related work- place homicides); Brief for Social Scientists et al. as Amici Curiae 15–16, and nn. 17–20 (citing “thirteen . . . empirical papers from just the last few years linking [“shall issue”] laws to higher violent crime”).




The data say that the laws decrease violence in states that had them.


----------



## LIVEFRMNYC

SuperMatt said:


> I understand you think it may not change much. However, the statistics in states with laws similar to NY’s as opposed to those without them is telling. Here’s what Justice Breyer had to say:
> 
> 
> 
> The data say that the laws decrease violence in states that had them.




I personally don't think you can just take those stats at face value without looking at other stats.   You have to look at the population, economy, gang activity, sentencing laws, gentrification, and etc.    Also, those years cover a good number of eras, most notably, the Crack era, but also multiple recessions, and today dealing with the effects of Covid.   I think factoring states as a whole is different than cites within those states. 

Big cities like NYC and LA have a much larger budget for law enforcement, and endlessly being developed.  

In 2021 Chicago had close to 800 homicides, most from shootings.  The more populated NYC at 485, and LA at 395.   And Chicago as I believe has stricter gun laws than NYC.   
And in the not so distant past, New Orleans had the highest percentage per capita (probably still does).  Houston in 2021  had more homicides than NYC or LA.  

I simply don't see a clear pattern.  
I don't think it's safe to say that a ban on conceal carry is proven to make a city safer, or allowing it makes a city less safe.


----------



## SuperMatt

LIVEFRMNYC said:


> I personally don't think you can just take those stats at face value without looking at other stats.   You have to look at the population, economy, gang activity, sentencing laws, gentrification, and etc.    Also, those years cover a good number of eras, most notably, the Crack era, but also multiple recessions, and today dealing with the effects of Covid.   I think factoring states as a whole is different than cites within those states.
> 
> Big cities like NYC and LA have a much larger budget for law enforcement, and endlessly being developed.
> 
> In 2021 Chicago had close to 800 homicides, most from shootings.  The more populated NYC at 485, and LA at 395.   And Chicago as I believe has stricter gun laws than NYC.
> And in the not so distant past, New Orleans had the highest percentage per capita (probably still does).  Houston in 2021  had more homicides than NYC or LA.
> 
> I simply don't see a clear pattern.
> I don't think it's safe to say that a ban on conceal carry is proven to make a city safer, or allowing it makes a city less safe.



The fact that the data spans such a long time period and persists over the course of many studies gives it more credibility, not less.

When the mass shootings started in 1999, the NRA promised more guns would solve the problem. The opposite has happened. The more loose gun laws have become, the more gun deaths we have in America.

It’s insanity to think that continued loosening of gun laws and more gun purchases will turn the trend in the other direction.


----------



## LIVEFRMNYC

SuperMatt said:


> The fact that the data spans such a long time period and persists over the course of many studies gives it more credibility, not less.
> 
> When the mass shootings started in 1999, the NRA promised more guns would solve the problem. The opposite has happened. The more loose gun laws have become, the more gun deaths we have in America.
> 
> It’s insanity to think that continued loosening of gun laws and more gun purchases will turn the trend in the other direction.




Well I'm no fan of the NRA, nor do I view guns as a solution to anything.   I'm also no fan of gun manufacturers having god like immunity to civil suits or criminal charges.  
I'm definitely think we should have a National Gun Registry.  

What I'm 100% against is, not having the right to carry my firearm outside my home within reasonable public locations. 

The majority of shootings (fatal or not) come from those with illegal possession and/or in the act of a crime. 

The real problem is, the amount of guns that get into the hands of criminals.  The ones up to no good are not in possession of old decrepit guns.  The amount of loopholes and gun trafficking keeps them with a constant flow.  I personally don't understand how the supply from gun manufacturers matches the actually legal demand.


----------



## SuperMatt

LIVEFRMNYC said:


> Well I'm no fan of the NRA, nor do I view guns as a solution to anything.   I'm also no fan of gun manufacturers having god like immunity to civil suits or criminal charges.
> I'm definitely think we should have a National Gun Registry.
> 
> What I'm 100% against is, not having the right to carry my firearm outside my home within reasonable public locations.
> 
> The majority of shootings (fatal or not) come from those with illegal possession and/or in the act of a crime.
> 
> The real problem is, the amount of guns that get into the hands of criminals.  The ones up to no good are not in possession of old decrepit guns.  The amount of loopholes and gun trafficking keeps them with a constant flow.  I personally don't understand how the supply from gun manufacturers matches the actually legal demand.



While I don’t personally agree that the right to carry a gun everywhere on your person is guaranteed by the 2nd amendment, I do agree that the many loopholes in background checks are a big reason we have 12 guns for every 10 Americans.

I think the NRA’s #1 interest is the manufacturers, and a pipeline of straw purchasers is good for their business, so keeping the laws as lax as possible on those types of shady dealings are a priority for the NRA.


----------



## SuperMatt

English law from 1688 is more important than the actual text of the constitution. Yes, this is your “originalism” from Clarence Thomas.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1540001916389695489/

I guess the idea is to be more like medieval England:

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1540005971275042818/

Of course, here’s one argument FOR such a strategy: I guess you gotta laugh or you’ll cry…

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1540007747621916672/


----------



## SuperMatt

There is some room for optimism.

The Senate has passed a gun control bill. Although it doesn’t do much, I think something is better than nothing. Another reason for optimism is that the NRA opposed even this modest bill, and 15 GOP Senators voted for it anyway. Is the NRA’s influence waning? I certainly hope so.

I also saw that Maine already changed their school funding law to get around the Supreme Court’s ruling. So I think NY and other states will find ways to limit the proliferation of firearms despite the absurd ruling this week.


----------



## SuperMatt

This piece offers an unvarnished look at what the Supreme Court has become:









						The US supreme court voted in favour of … people getting shot — Guardian US
					

The supreme court think that restrictions on handguns are grotesquely exceeding their powers. But outlawing abortion? Totally fine




					apple.news
				






> Even those pretending that there is a true legal philosophy at play here have to struggle to keep a straight face. “The test is, uh, if we had a seance, can we imagine that a powder-wig-wearing slaveholder with wooden teeth would have imagined this same exact law, word for word, in 1776?”






> The court is now fully in control of people who believe they are on a mission from god to drag America back to the good old days of 1885, when corporations were free to whip who they wanted and noble American men wore six shooters everywhere and women stayed home and had babies whether they liked it or not.


----------



## LIVEFRMNYC

SuperMatt said:


> There is some room for optimism.
> 
> The Senate has passed a gun control bill. Although it doesn’t do much, I think something is better than nothing. Another reason for optimism is that the NRA opposed even this modest bill, and 15 GOP Senators voted for it anyway. Is the NRA’s influence waning? I certainly hope so.
> 
> I also saw that Maine already changed their school funding law to get around the Supreme Court’s ruling. So I think NY and other states will find ways to limit the proliferation of firearms despite the absurd ruling this week.




It's going to be next to impossible to get around the ruling.  It has already been stated that NYC can't declare the entire Manhattan or any borough a gun free zone.


----------



## SuperMatt

LIVEFRMNYC said:


> It's going to be next to impossible to get around the ruling.  It has already been stated that NYC can't declare the entire Manhattan or any borough a gun free zone.



You could be right. It’s amazing how fast we went from 2008’s Heller decision to this. Heller: Guns are an individual right, but Scalia gave great latitude to states to regulate them. Now it is *the court* who dictates how the states may regulate guns.

One other baffling thing about this ruling was that it refused to define what special places guns could be controlled in. Only that an entire city is too big. It would have been reasonable to give some guidance. Because as it stands, it’s a wide open question. As you said, if it cannot be a city, could it be a borough? Maybe you could ban them from a small government building, but how about a big stadium? If 80.000 people can gather there, why can’t they all be packing heat?

No clear guidance, no apparent judicial philosophy (definitely NOT the textualism they claim to follow), no regard for the shifting attitudes in America towards more gun control…

Judges are supposed to be wise, and judge in a way that acknowledges the effects of their rulings. This ruling is the farthest thing from that IMO. They are paving the way to an expanded court, term limits, or both. Their ideology is NOT reflective of the vast majority of American opinion, nor of centuries of precedent. The court is on a quickly shrinking island.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

SuperMatt said:


> There is some room for optimism.
> 
> The Senate has passed a gun control bill. Although it doesn’t do much, I think something is better than nothing.




This doesn’t give me any hope. When was the last time Congress passed gun control legislation, 30 years ago? With this legislation and the current climate mass shootings will continue and likely grow and then Congress will go “We’ve already done everything possible. We couldn’t possibly revisit this for at least 3 more decades.”

And Republicans aren't appalled by mass shootings.  They celebrate them.  It gives them a reason to sell an authoritarian police state that will solve all problems through government-sanctioned violence against specific groups of people where the white gunman is never the bad guy.  The bad guy is liberal America that pushed him to shoot.


----------



## LIVEFRMNYC

SuperMatt said:


> You could be right. It’s amazing how fast we went from 2008’s Heller decision to this. Heller: Guns are an individual right, but Scalia gave great latitude to states to regulate them. Now it is *the court* who dictates how the states may regulate guns.
> 
> One other baffling thing about this ruling was that it refused to define what special places guns could be controlled in. Only that an entire city is too big. It would have been reasonable to give some guidance. Because as it stands, it’s a wide open question. As you said, if it cannot be a city, could it be a borough? Maybe you could ban them from a small government building, but how about a big stadium? If 80.000 people can gather there, why can’t they all be packing heat?
> 
> No clear guidance, no apparent judicial philosophy (definitely NOT the textualism they claim to follow), no regard for the shifting attitudes in America towards more gun control…
> 
> Judges are supposed to be wise, and judge in a way that acknowledges the effects of their rulings. This ruling is the farthest thing from that IMO. They are paving the way to an expanded court, term limits, or both. Their ideology is NOT reflective of the vast majority of American opinion, nor of centuries of precedent. The court is on a quickly shrinking island.




Well the NY gov and NYC mayor have already stated ....  NYC Subway system, Gov buildings, Arenas, and etc, are up in the air as a gun free zone.   They especially emphasized the Subway system, so I think that's a given.


----------



## SuperMatt

LIVEFRMNYC said:


> Well the NY gov and NYC mayor have already stated ....  NYC Subway system, Gov buildings, Arenas, and etc, are up in the air as a gun free zone.   They especially emphasized the Subway system, so I think that's a given.



Sure but if they get sued for that by gun owners, how will the court rule? What is the guidance for appellate courts? Nobody knows… and that’s one of many major flaws in this ruling.


----------



## LIVEFRMNYC

SuperMatt said:


> Sure but if they get sued for that by gun owners, how will the court rule? What is the guidance for appellate courts? Nobody knows… and that’s one of many major flaws in this ruling.




Well somebody's always going to sue, for any and everything.  I think areas that are super congested, like the Subway, Times Square, gov/city properties, are more than reasonable.  Nobody would win a suit for that.


----------



## SuperMatt

LIVEFRMNYC said:


> Well somebody's always going to sue, for any and everything.  I think areas that are super congested, like the Subway, Times Square, gov/city properties, are more than reasonable.  Nobody would win a suit for that.



Much of Manhattan is just as congested as Times Square. Try walking the sidewalks of Hell’s Kitchen without at least brushing against somebody… Now imagine a gun-toting idiot with AR-15 and body armor waltzing in there. Even if they don’t shoot, the panic would lead to multiple injuries for sure.

And every political March in DC could now involve hundreds or thousands of armed people.

The court is insane. Period. They are completely disregarding all the things that can go wrong.


----------



## LIVEFRMNYC

SuperMatt said:


> Much of Manhattan is just as congested as Times Square. Try walking the sidewalks of Hell’s Kitchen without at least brushing against somebody… Now imagine a gun-toting idiot with AR-15 and body armor waltzing in there. Even if they don’t shoot, the panic would lead to multiple injuries for sure.
> 
> And every political March in DC could now involve hundreds or thousands of armed people.
> 
> The court is insane. Period. They are completely disregarding all the things that can go wrong.




Body armor is illegal in NYC.   And it's carry conceal, not open carry.  So an AR-15 would be out of the question.


----------



## SuperMatt

LIVEFRMNYC said:


> Body armor is illegal in NYC.   And it's carry conceal, not open carry.  So an AR-15 would be out of the question.



Thanks for the clarifications. I’m glad they can still prevent that type of open carry (we saw how it panicked people in Oklahoma recently).

I wonder if a possible solution to limit concealed weapon carry is a high price for the registration?


----------



## LIVEFRMNYC

SuperMatt said:


> I wonder if a possible solution to limit concealed weapon carry is a high price for the registration?





When I got mines decades ago, it was a $700 fee just to get an official to fill in the paper work and notarize it.  They won't accept your application otherwise.
Then I had to take that paperwork to Police headquarters at 1 Police Plaza in Manhattan, which I had to pay a small processing fee.
I was also required to get proof of membership at a shooting range, which was more money out my pocket.  This was to show my intention of having a firearm.  Telling them it's to protect your home or self is basically an automatic denial.
After a 6 month wait.  I get interviewed by a uniformed police officer and had a psych evaluation by another officer.  I felt like I was being interviewed to become a Police Officer.  
And about a week later, I get approved.
I'm sure the price is a bit higher nowadays.   And maybe you're right that it'll jump up again due to this ruling.

Now cause of this ruling, no longer does one need to be interviewed by any officer to question your reasoning for a gun permit.   So even for those that just want to keep a gun in the home, they don't have to have proof of a shooting range membership or lie about the reasoning behind wanting a permit.

So yea it's not a process or the payments for someone that just wants to cause trouble.


----------



## Herdfan

LIVEFRMNYC said:


> What I'm 100% against is, not having the right to carry my firearm outside my home within reasonable public locations.
> 
> The majority of shootings (fatal or not) come from those with illegal possession and/or in the act of a crime.
> 
> The real problem is, the amount of guns that get into the hands of criminals.  The ones up to no good are not in possession of old decrepit guns.  The amount of loopholes and gun trafficking keeps them with a constant flow.  I personally don't understand how the supply from gun manufacturers matches the actually legal demand.




I think we need to make all gun crimes a Federal crime, just like bank robbery.  Remove local DA's from being able to plead out cases to misdemeanors.

And then some mandatory minimums.

Illegal possession - 5 years
Felon in possession - 10 years
Commit crime with gun - 20 years

Get the criminals off the streets.


----------



## SuperMatt

Herdfan said:


> I think we need to make all gun crimes a Federal crime, just like bank robbery.  Remove local DA's from being able to plead out cases to misdemeanors.
> 
> And then some mandatory minimums.
> 
> Illegal possession - 5 years
> Felon in possession - 10 years
> Commit crime with gun - 20 years
> 
> Get the criminals off the streets.



Have you seen the police brutality thread? Have you read about the harms of mandatory minimums? Are you aware of the BLM protests? Why did they happen? Because black people are over-policed and unfairly policed. Post after post after post here on TA and MR about the systemic racism in American policing. And you pretend as if none of it exists?

We already incarcerate more people than any other country on earth. Putting more people in prison with mandatory minimums isn’t the solution to gun violence. Just like the war on drugs didn’t fix the drug problem.

This is a racist “solution” to the problem. It wouldn’t fix a thing, but would put more black people in jail for longer sentences.

Want less gun violence? Try having fewer guns. Every single study shows the correlation between the obscene amount of guns in America and our gun violence problem. More guns than any other developed nation, and more gun violence too. It’s not a coincidence.


----------



## SuperMatt

A law professor dissects the gun-rights decision of the court this week:









						The Historical Cherry-Picking at the Heart of the Supreme Court’s Gun-Rights Expansion
					

A century-old New York law requiring individuals to prove “proper cause” to carry a handgun has been struck down. Are other gun-safety measures in peril?




					www.newyorker.com
				






> *In terms of the decision itself, what was notable about how the Court presented the history of the Second Amendment and guns?*
> 
> Most notable is that the Court says it is going to look to history and tradition, but then ignores history and tradition. The Court says that only gun laws which have historical precedent are constitutionally permissible, and then the Court dismisses all of the historical precedents for heavy restrictions on concealed-carry laws as outliers. The Court says that it is going to look to history, but dismisses early English common law as too old. The Court says that it is going to look to history, but dismisses any laws that were adopted after the mid-eighteen-hundreds as too young. The Court says that it is looking to history, but also says that shall-issue permitting is constitutional, even though shall-issue permitting is a twentieth-century invention. So the Court says that it is doing history and tradition analysis, but conveniently ignores any history it doesn’t like.
> 
> *In terms of picking and choosing historical precedents, is that out of the norm or a common feature of Court decisions?*
> 
> 
> This is singular. The Court says that history and tradition analysis is the way that constitutional rights should be analyzed. But all you have to do is go back to Tuesday’s decision on the funding of religious schools. The Court didn’t do any history and tradition analysis to show that there is a First Amendment requirement that states finance religious schools. [In the gun case,] the Court rejects the kind of interest-balancing that is commonplace in constitutional law more generally.




And a historian makes the case of why Supreme Court justices should stay away from trying to be authorities on history:









						Why Heller Is Such Bad History
					






					firearmslaw.duke.edu
				






> And yet, the ruling in Heller required a decision on just this matter. This difficulty is why the ruling deserved to be answered 5-4 one way or the other. Heller is not bad history because it rules that individuals had the right to bear arms outside of participation in the militia. It is bad history because it viewed the individual right to bear arms as why the amendment was written in the first place; it is bad history in its claim that the Second Amendment protected “only individuals’ liberty to keep and carry arms.” [emphasis added]. With this approach, Scalia shifted the decision from a questionable but defensible answer to the question the court had been asked, to a mischaracterization of the nature of the amendment itself. That mischaracterization, rather than the decision itself, is what makes Heller such bad history.


----------



## Herdfan

SuperMatt said:


> Have you seen the police brutality thread? Have you read about the harms of mandatory minimums? Are you aware of the BLM protests? Why did they happen? Because black people are over-policed and unfairly policed. Post after post after post here on TA and MR about the systemic racism in American policing. And you pretend as if none of it exists?
> 
> 
> 
> This is a racist “solution” to the problem. It wouldn’t fix a thing, but would put more black people in jail for longer sentences.




That is a separate issue.  It certainly needs to be addressed and fixed.

But if a Black person commits a gun crime, should they just be let go with no punishment?


----------



## SuperMatt

Herdfan said:


> That is a separate issue.  It certainly needs to be addressed and fixed.
> 
> But if a Black person commits a gun crime, should they just be let go with no punishment?



That might be the lamest strawman attempt of all time. I mean, you didn’t even bother making a strawman with clothes and such and stick it on a pole. You just grabbed a bunch of straw in your hand and called it a strawman. 

Because somebody dared to point out the systemic racism in America, your comeback is that they are advocating for letting people commit all the crimes they want with no punishment? That is unbelievable.

Meanwhile, you literally advocated for the white insurrectionists on Jan 6 to be given a break because “they just got caught up in it."


----------



## LIVEFRMNYC

Herdfan said:


> That is a separate issue.  It certainly needs to be addressed and fixed.
> 
> But if a Black person commits a gun crime, should they just be let go with no punishment?




Feds don't have that much man power, enforcement or judicial wise.  Way too many get caught with an illegal gun.  And they are not going to do intensive investigative work for every single gun charge.


----------



## JayMysteri0

Herdfan said:


> That is a separate issue.  It certainly needs to be addressed and fixed.
> 
> But if a Black person commits a gun crime, should they just be let go with no punishment?



You are summing up the issue yourself.

When is it addressed & fixed?  Because we haven't done it yet.

What would be made into a sort of a "War on Guns" would again be specifically directed like previous "wars on crimes".  You yourself have been a big cheerleader of the factually incorrect Chicago narrative, what criminals do you think will be pursued first?  The guy who goes out earlier to buy a weapon to shoot a doctor because of back pain, or the gang member who couldn't buy a gun in his state because of gun laws so he brought one from someone who purchased in the next state?

It isn't going to be about a Black person with a gun committing a crime, it's going to be statistically about a Black person period.  We've already seen it doesn't matter if the Black person doesn't have a gun, is a legal gun owner, is a "good guy with a gun", or a criminal.  It won't end well once "fear for their lives" is invoked.  Meanwhile White kid rolls into a church, meets with parishioners, then shoots them.  The police can't take him alive.

Historically it is been proven that in this country, punishment will ALWAYS be unfairly applied.


----------



## GermanSuplex

Huge victory for Biden I’m getting something done.

The left is really sour on Biden, but I’m having a hard time downplaying his accomplishments in his first 18 months. COVID relief, Afghanistan pullout with an actual minimal loss of American lives (the tragic losses of troops we suffered pales in to comparison than if he had kicked the can down the road), infrastructure, and now a significant gun control bill.

That’s a pretty impressive resume for 18 months. What did Trump accomplish besides rich guy socialism?


----------



## ronntaylor

GermanSuplex said:


> Huge victory for Biden I’m getting something done.
> 
> The left is really sour on Biden, but I’m having a hard time downplaying his accomplishments in his first 18 months. COVID relief, Afghanistan pullout with an actual minimal loss of American lives (the tragic losses of troops we suffered pales in to comparison than if he had kicked the can down the road), infrastructure, and now a significant gun control bill.
> 
> That’s a pretty impressive resume for 18 months. What did Trump accomplish besides rich guy socialism?



Shush!! You can't talk about reality. Especially amongst so-called progressives. If you don't hand out ice cream cones and pony rides... y'knowwhut, let me go watch my Yankees.


----------



## SuperMatt

A man killed a young woman and wounded another (while her 5-year-old child watched) because there was too much mayonnaise on his sandwich.

F!#@ the Supreme Court for making it EASIER for people to get guns.









						Suspect arrested after mayo dispute at Atlanta Subway leaves worker dead
					

An employee at a downtown Atlanta sub shop was killed Sunday and her coworker was seriously injured when a customer angered by a condiment pulled out a gun, police said.




					www.ajc.com


----------



## SuperMatt

In light of one of the Supreme Court’s latest rulings (Guns' Lives Matter), people are suing the DC Metro system to allow them to carry firearms on-board.

There’s a Metro stop very close to the Supreme Court, so I wonder... will the court put their money where their mouth is? Although with Trump’s famous “Wall” now relocated from the Mexican border to instead surrounding the Supreme Court, maybe they don’t care.









						Gun owners sue D.C., demanding to carry firearms on Metro — The Washington Post
					

The plaintiffs say a recent Supreme Court ruling opens the door for guns on buses and Metro trains.




					apple.news


----------



## JayMysteri0

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1543698525149700098/

Yeah, abortions are the problem, let's ban THEM.

Meanwhile those kids were scared out of their minds.

Welcome to America kids.


----------



## Joe

America is ghetto.


----------



## GermanSuplex

Six dead, two-dozen injured in Highland Park, IL today. Young white male, late-teens or early twenties, no known motive as of yet, and the gunman is still on the loose.

Can’t even enjoy parades any more with these nuts.

Looking forward to Tucker Carlson - who claimed the man in Wisconsin who ran over people was a terrorist (and he was) - explain why this was just a “troubled young man”


----------



## JayMysteri0

GermanSuplex said:


> Six dead, two-dozen injured in Highland Park, IL today. Young white male, late-teens or early twenties, no known motive as of yet, and the gunman is still on the loose.
> 
> Can’t even enjoy parades any more with these nuts.
> 
> Looking forward to Tucker Carlson - who claimed the man in Wisconsin who ran over people was a terrorist (and he was) - explain why this was just a “troubled young man”



What's the number one deflection for any shooting?  Especially if this one occurred in IL?

Why Chicago of course.  

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1544039100478394368/
The person who the poster is responding to, got so ratioed they deleted this tweet, but did keep their response up.


> ben5189
> @ben51891
> ·
> 2h
> 
> Replying to
> @ChicagoCritter
> No one talking about the other 7-8 people killed on the south side since Friday




https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1544046966224846848/

It's interesting that unless there's a shooting, there's that specific group that never brings up Chicago any other time.


https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1544034170707607552/


----------



## JayMysteri0

So it's believed they've identified the Highland Park shooter.  You maybe surprised.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1544077121596825601/
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1544080323247480832/

If you've been in a coma the last half century.  

But hey, there's always a TFG

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1544074568830107649/

and they're getting the America they wanted.



> Following the mass shooting at a July 4 parade in Highland Park, Illinois, a Trump-backed gubernatorial candidate bluntly urged the community to “move on.” Standing next to supporters at a different parade, after taking a moment in prayer, state Sen. Darren Bailey, said: “Let’s move on and celebrate the independence of this nation.” He added, “We have got to get corruption and evil out of our government.” After being roasted on social media, Bailey released a statement that said, “I apologize if in any way we diminished the pain being felt across our state today.” He also wrote on Twitter: “I send our heartfelt prayers to the victims of the shooting in Highland Park. July 4th is supposed to be a holiday for families, for parades, for celebrating the American Dream, but when people don't feel safe in their own community, they are deprived of that dream.”




Yes, those people were deprived of that dream that you want to move on from, to celebrate your holiday.

Guns + domestic terrorists = what could go wrong?


----------



## Cmaier

JayMysteri0 said:


> So it's believed they've identified the Highland Park shooter.  You maybe surprised.
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1544077121596825601/
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1544080323247480832/
> 
> If you've been in a coma the last half century.
> 
> But hey, there's always a TFG
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1544074568830107649/
> 
> and they're getting the America they wanted.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, those people were deprived of that dream that you want to move on from, to celebrate your holiday.
> 
> Guns + domestic terrorists = what could go wrong?



Wtf is that video supposed to be?


----------



## Yoused

Cmaier said:


> Wtf is that video supposed to be?


----------



## GermanSuplex

Suspect in custody - probably heading to a drive-thru restaurant of his choice now.

Nonetheless, I’m glad he’s alive and caught.


----------



## JayMysteri0

GermanSuplex said:


> Suspect in custody - probably heading to a drive-thru restaurant of his choice now.
> 
> Nonetheless, I’m glad he’s alive and caught.



Yeah, he was a known threat, so of course they took him alive.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1544119157947478016/
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1544129099097968640/

If I read they stopped to get slushies on the way to the station because it was hot, I wouldn't be surprised.

If you're Black & unarmed, get shot.  If you're Black and armed, get shot.  If you're White and shot & killed people, brought in safely.  WTF?!

Ever reliable...
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1544086633875660801/


----------



## SuperMatt

Ban all AR-15s immediately. Make it a felony to own one. I watched a video of the shooting and the speed with which rounds were fired is completely unconscionable for a civilian-owned weapon. 

Enough of this!


----------



## GermanSuplex

SuperMatt said:


> Ban all AR-15s immediately. Make it a felony to own one. I watched a video of the shooting and the speed with which rounds were fired is completely unconscionable for a civilian-owned weapon.
> 
> Enough of this!




It seemed that the only time a republican came out in favor of marriage equality - if ever - was when their own child came out. I pray it doesn't take the same kind of personal experience for them to change their mind about guns.

I don't know how long this can continue to happen, and its getting progressively worse. I'm glad they signed something into law recently, but its not enough. Too many different state laws surrounding the very serious of guns. As you said, we need strong federal leadership.


----------



## Citysnaps

GermanSuplex said:


> I'm glad they signed something into law recently, but its not enough.




It's basically lip service.

"Hardening" schools?  Really?  How about parades, shopping malls, night clubs, churches/synagogues, music venues, big box stores, colleges/universities, grocery stores, subway cars, spring break parties, movie theaters, libraries, and on and on. Not. Going. To. Happen.

Background checks are pretty much a joke, other than flagging arrests. There should be real background checks where neighbors, past employers, and friends (and friends of listed friends)  are interviewed, similar to those used in government security clearances.  Expanding mental health services?  Right... more lip service.  

All assault weapons (semiautomatic rifles firing high velocity ammunition) for private use need to be banned.

*Slaughtered human beings have been reduced to mere consequences of no-limitations gun ownership. *  That should never be OK.


----------



## SuperMatt

citypix said:


> It's basically lip service.
> 
> "Hardening" schools?  Really?  How about parades, shopping malls, night clubs, churches/synagogues, music venues, big box stores, colleges/universities, grocery stores, subway cars, spring break parties, movie theaters, libraries, and on and on. Not. Going. To. Happen.
> 
> Background checks are pretty much a joke, other than flagging arrests. There should be real background checks where neighbors, past employers, and friends (and friends of listed friends are interviewed) similar to those used in government security clearances.  Expanding mental health services?  Right... more lip service.  Ban all assault weapons (semiautomatic rifles firing high velocity ammunition) for private use.
> 
> *Slaughtered human beings have been reduced to mere consequences of no-limitations gun ownership. *  That should never be OK.



And the “red flag” laws aren’t laws at all. They are “encouragements” for states to adopt such laws. We know that extremist right-wingers will NEVER let that happen in “their” states. We know it because after the Affordable Care Act passed, those extremists turned down billions in free money to help their resident’s health. For no other reason than to “own the libs” and show how much they hated a black president. Heck, some states held referendums to get the funding, and then these insane legislators overturned the popular will! If that doesn’t tell you how bad gerrymandering is, what does?


----------



## Citysnaps

SuperMatt said:


> We know it because after the Affordable Care Act passed, those extremists turned down billions in free money to help their resident’s health.




Excellent point - I remember that. So much for caring about the health of their citizens. Dumbfukery at its finest.


----------



## DT

JayMysteri0 said:


> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1543698525149700098/
> 
> Yeah, abortions are the problem, let's ban THEM.
> 
> Meanwhile those kids were scared out of their minds.
> 
> Welcome to America kids.




The penalty for public discharge of a weapon like, regardless of circumstances, should be severe, that fuckwit in the truck should be looking at the walls of a prison for at least 25 years, you hit someone?  That's 50 to life.

I've advocated for much more severe brandishing laws, I drive by you and you flash a gun at me, and I can ID you on a camera?  Go to jail for 5 years.


----------



## AG_PhamD

SuperMatt said:


> Ban all AR-15s immediately. Make it a felony to own one. I watched a video of the shooting and the speed with which rounds were fired is completely unconscionable for a civilian-owned weapon.
> 
> Enough of this!




Any illegal possession of a gun should be a felony charge. Period.

I am gun owner (mainly because I had an internship preceptor who was also a firearms instructor and gun fanatic and insisted he train me- not because I was particularly interested or wanted it for security ). Other than the fact he gifted me a Glock G19 and I got a Colt 1911 as a gift from someone else, I don’t think I’d waste my money on a gun. My permit is in CT but I live in Mass, so I keep my guns at my parents and haven’t fired them in years.

Between him and some other friends I have that collect guns, I’ve fired many different types but have always felt AR-15’s are excessive. Frankly I don’t fire them that “fun” either. Personally, I find historic bolt action rifles far more interesting like a Lee Enfield.

AR-15’s do shoot quickly, but they’re really not that substantially faster than your average semi-auto pistol. The issue is that you can fire quickly, with great range and accuracy, with very little recoil, and with 30-100 round magazines. Plus a 556 rifle round is going to do a lot more damage than say a 9mm pistol round. That’s why I don’t find them that fun and a bit over the top for self defense.

I think an AR-15 aka semi-auto rifle ban is entirely reasonable because I don’t see them as particularly reasonable weapons. Or restricting their sales like most states do with pistols (esp concealed carry permits) or preferably even stricter regulations such as limiting their magazine sizes.

The argument from the AR-15 proponents is that pistols kill far more people, which is entirely true. But the fact of the matter is assault rifles kill is the weapon of choice for those seeking to kill en masse. And even though mass shootings are a drop in the bucket when it comes to total gun deaths, it’s an absolutely unacceptable number, especially when all too often children are involved.

Raising  the age for gun ownership to AT LEAST 21 is a must- ideally 24/25. The statistics on gun crimes make j it very clear why this should be the case. Things are just too ridiculous and have been for far too long.

The most recent shooting in Highland Park once again demonstrates a disturbed young man with plenty of red flags, apparently going back to middle school in the alleged perpetrators case. This cannot be nmmmm.

For the “not another inch” pro gun fanatics, I can only hope they will begin to realize it would behoove them to start looking for room to compromise if they expect to keep their guns at all. Think about the number of incidents that could be prevented by simply raising the minimum age by a few years on assault rifles.

We’re well beyond ridiculous at this point.


----------



## Citysnaps

AG_PhamD said:


> I think an AR-15 aka semi-auto rifle ban is entirely reasonable because I don’t see them as particularly reasonable weapons.





Because there are many assault weapon manufacturers, how about banning _any_ semi-automatic rifle that accepts a high muzzle velocity cartridge. With the velocity being specified; for example: >2,000ft/second. Or perhaps kinetic energy.

That gets around the definition of an assault weapon being ambiguous.  Different manufacturers, stock/no stock, lugs for a strap, special optical mounts, foldable stock, etc.


----------



## AG_PhamD

citypix said:


> Because there are many assault weapon manufacturers, how about banning _any_ semi-automatic rifle that accepts a high muzzle velocity cartridge. With the velocity being specified; for example: >2,000ft/second. Or perhaps kinetic energy.
> 
> That gets around the definition of an assault weapon being ambiguous.  Different manufacturers, stock/no stock, lugs for a strap, special optical mounts, foldable stock, etc.




Yeah, there are a number of way “assault riffles” could be defined. I have long said I hate the arguments from the pro-gun hardliners that defining AR-15-like guns is a technical impossibly. On the other hand, I think it’s important for those advocating for gun control to be informed on what they’re arguing for so as not to come off as sounding totally uninformed and lacking credibility- like evidently not understanding what semi-automatic means or calling 10 round magazines as “high capacity”.


----------



## Citysnaps

AG_PhamD said:


> I have long said I hate the arguments from the pro-gun hardliners that defining AR-15-like guns is a technical impossibly.




I often get that retort from no-limitations gun owners.  I think that's BS.


----------



## JayMysteri0

In case anyone was wondering where their crazy old racist uncle wandered off to, we found him

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1544510760151285766/

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1544520279996628993/


----------



## JayMysteri0

Did THEY ( NRA ) really go there, NOW?!  

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1544505595314700289/

Sit the F down, and STFU NRA.  They aren't even trying to hide the lack of concern for human life anymore.


----------



## SuperMatt

How is this group still around?

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1543952330235777024/

“The only reason you’re celebrating… is because citizens were armed…”

Hmm… actually there was no celebration in Highland Park and a 2-year-old has to grow up without parents… because citizens were armed.

PS - Two *different* posts about tone-deaf nastiness from the NRA within the same minute… they are truly on a roll.


----------



## SuperMatt

Some tips from Reddit on what to do if there’s an active shooter:


----------



## JayMysteri0

Amen.
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1544472554642935808/


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

I'm sure the victims and families of these shootings take great comfort in knowing they took a bullet (or more) to prop up a political agenda.  There can be no greater calling.  Lucky bastards.


----------



## Yoused

mass shootings occur because women nag men all the time

*BowTieAss*:​* And of course, they’re angry. They know that their lives will not be better than their parents’. They’ll be worse. That’s all but guaranteed. They know that. They’re not that stupid. And yet the authorities in their lives – mostly women – never stop lecturing them about their so-called privilege. “You’re male, you’re privileged!”
Imagine that. Try to imagine an unhealthier, unhappier life than that. So, a lot of young men in America are going nuts. Are you surprised?*​
Way to self-pwn.


----------



## sgtaylor5

There was a stretch of road near my old hometown that crossed the state line and on either end were two state universities. Lots of traffic because the one state college had a drinking age of 18 and the other one in my state had a drinking age of 21. You can see where this is going; lots of deaths on the road because they were driving too fast and under the influence of alcohol.

My father said that nothing was ever going to happen on that road to fix it until some state senator lost their child on that road. I fear this is what is going to have to happen with guns in the present environment in this country.

The road did get fixed eventually. But it took way too long.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Hey, man who shot President Reagan says we need stricter gun control.  But what does he know.









						John Hinckley Jr., who shot President Reagan, says he supports gun control measures
					

The man who shot President Ronald Reagan in the early 1980s says he supports stricter gun control measures — including keeping firearms out of the hands of people with mental health problems.




					nypost.com


----------



## Eric

I've been both saddened and disgusted by all of these recent shootings and just don't know how to respond. I'll just say that we'll allow the most troubled of individuals, even with every red flag in the book going off, to buy these weapons without question which are in turned used for mass murders and it's unbelievable that we not only refuse to address, but have politicians defending it.

I mean, what can you even say to this anymore, we flat out enable these psychos to placate "freedom" lovers and you have Republicans handing out weapons of war like candy while forcing 10 year old little girls to have babies. This country has turned into a fucking clown car.


----------



## SuperMatt

Eric said:


> I've been both saddened and disgusted by all of these recent shootings and just don't know how to respond. I'll just say that we'll allow the most troubled of individuals, even with every red flag in the book going off, to buy these weapons without question which are in turned used for mass murders and it's unbelievable that we not only refuse to address, but have politicians defending it.
> 
> I mean, what can you even say to this anymore, we flat out enable these psychos to placate "freedom" lovers and you have Republicans handing out weapons of war like candy while forcing 10 year old little girls to have babies. This country has turned into a fucking clown car.



The gun laws are a problem, but so is the “gun culture” in America. The mother of a young man injured in the Buffalo shooting said something that really stuck with me. She couldn’t believe that the shooter’s parents bought him a gun for his 16th birthday. She said she bought her son video games, pizza, and a cake for his 16th.

There is a strong message sent when you give your kids guns as gifts. It perpetuates a culture of violence. And we have millions of parents doing so.

I’m not sure which is easier to change: the culture or the law. Ideally, we would aim to change both.


----------



## SuperMatt

Again with parents: I just saw on TV that in order to get a special ID needed to buy guns in, the Illinois killer‘s dad needed to sign off on it. And his dad knew his son was suicidal and threatening to harm the family In 2019.


----------



## GermanSuplex

GermanSuplex said:


> Looking forward to Tucker Carlson - who claimed the man in Wisconsin who ran over people was a terrorist (and he was) - explain why this was just a “troubled young man”




Did not take long. Full of lies and BS.

_TUCKER CARLSON (HOST): Look at Robert "Bobby" Crimo. Would you sell a gun to that guy? Does he seem like a nutcase? Of course he does. So, why didn't anyone raise an alarm?

Well, maybe because he didn't stand out, maybe because there's a lot of young men in America who suddenly look and act a lot like this guy. That's not an attack, it's just true. Like Crimo, they inhabit a solitary fantasy world of social media, porn, and video games. They are high on government endorsed weed. "Smoke some more! It's good for you." They're numbed by the endless psychotropic drugs that are handed out at every school in the country by crackpots posing as counselors._









						Opinion | Tucker Carlson's culprit for the Highland Park shooting is mind-boggling — MSNBC
					

Authorities haven't determine a motive for the shooting. But Carlson thinks it's about feminism and mental health counseling.




					apple.news
				




If there was a kid raised by a homicidal racist maniac and a ham sandwich, Tucker would blame the damn sandwich.


----------



## JayMysteri0

What the ever loving f- ?!!!

Twitter:


> Arizona Representative Debbie Lesko says ‘I would do anything to protect my five grandchildren, including, as a last resort, shooting them, if i had to, to protect the lives of my grandchildren’ during her statement in opposition of gun control bill HR 2377



https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1544832466120331264/
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1544781668766064640/
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1544836045354647552/
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1544824553796517888/


----------



## AG_PhamD

SuperMatt said:


> Again with parents: I just saw on TV that in order to get a special ID needed to buy guns in, the Illinois killer‘s dad needed to sign off on it. And his dad knew his son was suicidal and threatening to harm the family In 2019.




Yeah, the father admits his son had mental health problems and the father signs off so his son under age 21 can purchase a gun… despite reportedly being suicidal 2 months earlier in a police report. Lots of questions here. This so called “father” (what good parent allows their mentally ill son to buy a gun?!) should be held liable here except that probably isn’t possible now that his son is over age 21. 

There was the Michigan shooting as well where the parents bought their 15 year old a pistol… totally illegal. 

There’s some real competition for parents of the year here.


----------



## AG_PhamD

JayMysteri0 said:


> What the ever loving f- ?!!!
> 
> Twitter:
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1544832466120331264/
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1544781668766064640/
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1544836045354647552/
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1544824553796517888/




I had to play that clip back 3 times to make sure I understood her correctly and to see if she misspoke. What on earth is she talking about?

A grandmother talking about maintaining her ability to shoot her grandchildren in order to “protect their lives” sounds like a red flag to me.


----------



## GermanSuplex

That’s what grandmas are for. Kisses, presents, home baked goodies and blowing your head off. You know, to protect you.


----------



## SuperMatt

This story from the child of a woman who was killed is heartbreaking.






These are the types of stories we hear after a war, not after a 4th of July parade.


----------



## Yoused

sgtaylor5 said:


> There was a stretch of road near my old hometown that crossed the state line and on either end were two state universities. Lots of traffic because the one state college had a drinking age of 18 and the other one in my state had a drinking age of 21. You can see where this is going; lots of deaths on the road because they were driving too fast and under the influence of alcohol.




I know of a road like that. One town is named for the capital of a foreign nation, the other for a type of train car. The situation is semi-reversed now, though, with cannabis legalized on the one side (for those over 21) but not the other.


----------



## Joe

JayMysteri0 said:


> What the ever loving f- ?!!!
> 
> Twitter:
> 
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1544832466120331264/
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1544781668766064640/
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1544836045354647552/
> https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1544824553796517888/




I mentioned this before. These people would sacrifice their own children...and here's proof lol


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Gun applicants in NY will have to hand over social media accounts
					

It’s an approach applauded by many Democrats and national gun control advocacy groups as missed warning signs pile up in investigations of mass killings.




					www.pbs.org
				




Nice. An epic setback for unhinged assholes.


----------



## ronntaylor

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> Gun applicants in NY will have to hand over social media accounts
> 
> 
> It’s an approach applauded by many Democrats and national gun control advocacy groups as missed warning signs pile up in investigations of mass killings.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.pbs.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nice. An epic setback for unhinged assholes.



Yeah, I don't think the NYPD will turn down applications from those that support BLM and/or Defund The Police. Right?


----------



## JayMysteri0

At this point...

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1545517570148540416/

Where are you safe from a gun when you leave the house?


----------



## Yoused

JayMysteri0 said:


> Where are you safe from a gun when you leave the house?



Where are you safe from a gun _inside the fucking house_? I just did a quick search that included "shot through walls" and was buried in hits, stories of people injured or killed at home by random bullets.


but guns don't kill people


----------



## JayMysteri0

More explanation why those trying for a "whatabout" & using the tragedy in Japan to whine about gun control, are still full of shit.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1545504592837885952/
https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1545567262135959553/

In California & Florida someone is killed by a gun almost every 3 hours.  Colorado 10.  We outpace Japan in one state in one day what they face in one year.   That's not even considering the random crazy shit one can face every day.



> Possible road rage shooting in Hollywood leaves man injured
> 
> 
> HOLLYWOOD, FLA. (WSVN) - A driver said he was forced to open fire after a stranger pointed a gun at him in the middle of...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> wsvn.com




I posted this incident earlier.



> Woman Injured After Shooting Between Two Cars on I-95 in NW Miami-Dade
> 
> 
> A woman was injured after she was caught in the crossfire of two cars that were shooting at each other on Interstate 95 in northwest Miami-Dade early Tuesday, officials said. Florida Highway Patrol officials said the incident happened around 1:15 a.m. in the southbound lanes of I-95 near...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nbcmiami.com




Those are injuries.  Spontaneous incidents involving guns and random people.  This is out of control here.


----------



## Eric

This video was really hard to watch, they basically stood around for all that time while those children were being slaughtered. Every last one of these people need to not only lose their jobs, but get charged as well.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1546968096094691328/


----------



## JayMysteri0

Sigh.  Shit will NEVER change.  We are F'N doomed.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1548807211912204291/


----------



## Herdfan

Meanwhile, a good guy with a gun stops a shooting:



> “But I’m going to tell you, the real hero of the day is the citizen that was lawfully carrying a firearm in that food court and was able to stop this shooter almost as soon as he began,” (Police Chief) Ison said.












						A gunman killed 3 people at an India mall before he was shot dead by an armed bystander
					

A shooting rampage that killed three people and injured two others at an Indiana mall ended after an armed witness shot and killed the assailant, police said.




					www.cnn.com
				




He didn't completely prevent it, but he certainly lowered the fatalities.


----------



## SuperMatt

Herdfan said:


> Meanwhile, a good guy with a gun stops a shooting:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A gunman killed 3 people at an India mall before he was shot dead by an armed bystander
> 
> 
> A shooting rampage that killed three people and injured two others at an Indiana mall ended after an armed witness shot and killed the assailant, police said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He didn't completely prevent it, but he certainly lowered the fatalities.



There is a saying I learned as a kid that seems apt here:

"The exception that proves the rule."


----------



## SuperMatt

God Bless America!


----------



## JayMysteri0

SuperMatt said:


> There is a saying I learned as a kid that seems apt here:
> 
> "The exception that proves the rule."



Exactly.  I don't think people get that if there is a rush to highlight the rare instance that champions their point, but don't highlight the rash of instances that don't make their point, they have basically made the point they hadn't intended.  You're still less likely to be killed in a mass shooting in India, than in the U.S.  So a "good guy with a gun" is less a manufactured necessity there, than it is here.


----------



## ronntaylor

> Of those *433 active shooter cases*, an *armed bystander shot the attacker in 22 of the incidents*. In *10 of those, the "good guy" was a security guard or an off-duty police officer*, the Times reported.
> 
> And having more than one armed person at the scene who is not a member of law enforcement can create confusion and carry dire risks, the report found. For example, an armed bystander who shot and killed an attacker in 2021 in Arvada, Colorado, was himself shot and killed by the police who mistook him for the gunman, the Times reported.




So 433 ACS, with 12 Citizens (AKA "good guy with a gun") intervening. And IIRC, at least three of those "good guys" killed/shot by LE.

America, Fuck Yeah!


----------



## ronntaylor

ronntaylor said:


> So 433 ACS, with 12 Citizens (AKA "good guy with a gun") intervening. And IIRC, at least three of those "good guys" killed/shot by LE.
> 
> America, Fuck Yeah!



Just reread the article and the figures are mind-blowing









						Who Stops a ‘Bad Guy With a Gun’?
					

A review of 433 active shooter attacks reveals that most are over before the police arrive. Bystanders sometimes stop attackers, but seldom shoot them.



					www.nytimes.com
				




The *paid* good guys with a gun (LEOs) show up and shoot the attacker maybe 1 out of 4 shootings. Uvalde was only an aberration in that police inaction was extended. And good guys that intervene most often *don't have a gun*. It's not even close.


----------



## SuperMatt

ronntaylor said:


> Just reread the article and the figures are mind-blowing
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who Stops a ‘Bad Guy With a Gun’?
> 
> 
> A review of 433 active shooter attacks reveals that most are over before the police arrive. Bystanders sometimes stop attackers, but seldom shoot them.
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The *paid* good guys with a gun (LEOs) show up and shoot the attacker maybe 1 out of 4 shootings. Uvalde was only an aberration in that police inaction was extended. And good guys that intervene most often *don't have a gun*. It's not even close.



In the end, bad guys with guns stop bad guys with guns most often (suicide by the mass shooters).


----------



## DT

ronntaylor said:


> And good guys that intervene most often *don't have a gun*. It's not even close.





... or the good guy, has a gun, and makes the wise decision not to draw it, even though they [presumably] have the correct training:









						Hero Houston cop recounts how he took down would-be shooter
					

Houston Police Sgt Kendrick Simpo was working a second job as a security guard at the Galleria Mall when he tackled Guido Herrera and grabbed his rifle outside a children's competition.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Joe

DT said:


> ... or the good guy, has a gun, and makes the wise decision not to draw it, even though they [presumably] have the correct training:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hero Houston cop recounts how he took down would-be shooter
> 
> 
> Houston Police Sgt Kendrick Simpo was working a second job as a security guard at the Galleria Mall when he tackled Guido Herrera and grabbed his rifle outside a children's competition.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk




Another religious nut.


----------



## SuperMatt

Students in a Dallas school district must wear clear backpacks after Uvalde shooting
					

The decision was made using a parent and student survey, as well as by the district's internal and external safety task forces.




					www.npr.org
				




I’m sorry - how is this supposed to help? Perhaps I missed something, but I don’t recall a school shooting in which the perpetrator snuck the weapon in using their backpack.

It’s pathetic to see these worthless bits of security theater. We all know the guns are the real issue. But one of the two parties in America cares about gun manufacturers more than America’s children.


----------



## Herdfan

SuperMatt said:


> It’s pathetic to see these worthless bits of security theater. We all know the guns are the real issue. *But one of the two parties in America cares about gun manufacturers more than America’s children.*




No, one party cares more about the rights of the people as stated in the Constitution.

I do have a question.  The left has as many wealthy donors as the right.  Why don't these donors simply either buy up every gun for sale (or at least handguns and semi-automatic rifles) or start buying out the manufacturers?  Make the supply so tight that prices will go through the roof so that no one can afford them.


----------



## GermanSuplex

Herdfan said:


> No, one party cares more about the rights of the people as stated in the Constitution.




Wrong. They care more about ONE right, which many would argue they've misinterpreted. But even if you concede the 2A is literally no regulations whatsoever on what type of guns one can own or who can own them, its hard to take them seriously about anything regarding the constitution after watching Trump wipe his ass with it and literally try to overturn a free and fair election because his feelings were hurt. "I win or there was fraud" - which was stated BEFORE the election - is not something you should hear from someone who is supposed to represent a party that cares about constitutional rights. Alternate slates of electors? Installing a nobody as AG? A crackpot lawyer as a special counsel? Inviting the Overstock CEO and a pillow salesman to the White House to plot a coup? Trying to pressure the VP to reject electoral votes? Sending a mob of lunatics to the Capitol to "fight like hell" because they "won't have a country anymore"? The media is the enemy of the people? Taking Putin's side over the side of those YOU YOURSELF chose for high-ranking jobs in the administration?

Holding the RNC at the White House and other federal property? Gassing peaceful protestors and demanding ten years prison for someone who spray paints a statue while admitting you want to pardon people who beat police and hung nooses?

The republican party stands for Donald Trump's ego, and that's about it.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

GermanSuplex said:


> Wrong. They care more about ONE right, which many would argue they've misinterpreted. But even if you concede the 2A is literally no regulations whatsoever on what type of guns one can own or who can own them, its hard to take them seriously about anything regarding the constitution after watching Trump wipe his ass with it and literally try to overturn a free and fair election because his feelings were hurt. "I win or there was fraud" - which was stated BEFORE the election - is not something you should hear from someone who is supposed to represent a party that cares about constitutional rights. Alternate slates of electors? Installing a nobody as AG? A crackpot lawyer as a special counsel? Inviting the Overstock CEO and a pillow salesman to the White House to plot a coup? Trying to pressure the VP to reject electoral votes? Sending a mob of lunatics to the Capitol to "fight like hell" because they "won't have a country anymore"? The media is the enemy of the people? Taking Putin's side over the side of those YOU YOURSELF chose for high-ranking jobs in the administration?
> 
> Holding the RNC at the White House and other federal property? Gassing peaceful protestors and demanding ten years prison for someone who spray paints a statue while admitting you want to pardon people who beat police and hung nooses?
> 
> The republican party stands for Donald Trump's ego, and that's about it.




The purpose of the US Supreme Court is to unite the states under common law. This Supreme Court seems to think its mandate is the polar opposite. Nobody on that side of the political spectrum has any interest in having “united” states and these people aren’t idiots. They know exactly what they are doing and the likely outcome. It’s the ultimate cynical elite chess game where we are pawns and they are bored with simply owning everything.  They want to watch from their safe box seats as they push everybody to extremes and use the 2nd amendment to slaughter each other.


----------



## SuperMatt

Herdfan said:


> No, one party cares more about the rights of the people as stated in the Constitution.



Yes, they are called the Democrats.


----------



## mac_in_tosh

Herdfan said:


> No, one party cares more about the rights of the people as stated in the Constitution.



The 2nd amendment explicitly mentions a "well regulated militia" that is necessary to the "security of a free State." This language was not put in there by accident and the Constitution further elaborates on these militias as shown below. Militias of musket owners formed to defend the new nation bear no relation to today's situation where individuals own all sorts of weapons, ironically in many cases because they think they have to defend themselves against the State.

U.S. Constitution, Article 1, Section 8 Powers of *Congress*:
o To provide for calling forth the *Militia* to execute the *Laws of the Union*, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
o* To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia*, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed *in the Service of the United States*, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline *prescribed by Congress*;

U.S. Constitution, Article 2, Section 2 Powers of the *president*:
o The *President* shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the *Militia* of the several States, when called into the actual *Service of the United States*


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

mac_in_tosh said:


> The 2nd amendment explicitly mentions a "well regulated militia" that is necessary to the "security of a free State." This language was not put in there by accident and the Constitution further elaborates on these militias as shown below. Militias of musket owners formed to defend the new nation bear no relation to today's situation where individuals own all sorts of weapons, ironically in many cases because they think they have to defend themselves against the State.
> 
> U.S. Constitution, Article 1, Section 8 Powers of *Congress*:
> o To provide for calling forth the *Militia* to execute the *Laws of the Union*, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
> o* To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia*, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed *in the Service of the United States*, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline *prescribed by Congress*;
> 
> U.S. Constitution, Article 2, Section 2 Powers of the *president*:
> o The *President* shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the *Militia* of the several States, when called into the actual *Service of the United States*




Honest question, has there ever been a situation where the government raided a group of gun stockpilers and that was the only questionable/illegal activity they were up to? I realize there’s a difference between questionable and illegal, but it seems these groups also love to constantly straddle that line and would quickly go into illegal territory shall their head brainwasher instruct them to. 

If these mass shootings exposed anything both sides can agree on, it’s that the laws already on the books aren’t being enforced and it doesn’t really matter when the laws are completely different when you easily cross an open border. Maybe we need to wall off way more than just the southern border.


----------



## GermanSuplex

It reminds me of a great poem I once read... I may have some of the words wrong.

First they never came for my guns, and I spoke out—
     Because I was an idiot.

Then they didn't force me to carry a child to term, and I spoke out—
     Because I was an idiot.

Then they counted the votes and picked a winner, and I spoke out —
     Because I was an idiot.

Man, woman, person, camera, tv.

It went something along those lines.


----------



## SuperMatt

mac_in_tosh said:


> The 2nd amendment explicitly mentions a "well regulated militia" that is necessary to the "security of a free State." This language was not put in there by accident and the Constitution further elaborates on these militias as shown below. Militias of musket owners formed to defend the new nation bear no relation to today's situation where individuals own all sorts of weapons, ironically in many cases because they think they have to defend themselves against the State.
> 
> U.S. Constitution, Article 1, Section 8 Powers of *Congress*:
> o To provide for calling forth the *Militia* to execute the *Laws of the Union*, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
> o* To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia*, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed *in the Service of the United States*, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline *prescribed by Congress*;
> 
> U.S. Constitution, Article 2, Section 2 Powers of the *president*:
> o The *President* shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the *Militia* of the several States, when called into the actual *Service of the United States*



Thanks for pointing all that out! It really exposes how little Justice Scalia ACTUALLY cared about the original text of the constitution. The meaning of the term *militia* was quite clear in the Constitution, but Scalia simply ignored it to push an agenda. His acolytes on the court now are all doing the exact same thing. “Honor the original text! (except the parts we don’t like)"


----------



## JayMysteri0

It's always the same F'N thing.  We have a massive proliferation of firearms, and it's been made remarkably easy relatively to get firearms & ammo.  So it's those whose lives will be put in danger who have to adapt / make adjustments because of the ease to get firearms, and the deadly consequences for all others.

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1549358414073061377/

What a childhood we are giving today's kids.


----------



## SuperMatt

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1549788275614810112/

Do we need the numbers of police vs killers to be greater than 376-to-1 like they were in Uvalde?

With the number of cops they want, they would have to give out badges to just about everybody. Maybe they can put them in the bottom of boxes of Lucky Charms or something.


----------



## Eric

Imagine working for an ignorant asshole like this.


__
		https://www.reddit.com/r/antiwork/comments/w4uzyb


----------



## The-Real-Deal82

Eric said:


> Imagine working for an ignorant asshole like this.
> 
> 
> __
> https://www.reddit.com/r/antiwork/comments/w4uzyb




He would be taken to the cleaners in the UK with a threat like that. You’d have people going to see him to get fired and get £30k at a tribunal.


----------



## Yoused

Road rage is so much fun









						Dad Shot After Splashing Windshield Fluid on Raging Driver's BMW: Family
					

Dennis Anderson's partner was uninjured, likely "due to her husband's body sheltering her from a spray of bullets," said a Go Fund Me.




					www.newsweek.com
				




Careful when you clean that windshield.


----------



## SuperMatt

Yoused said:


> Road rage is so much fun
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dad Shot After Splashing Windshield Fluid on Raging Driver's BMW: Family
> 
> 
> Dennis Anderson's partner was uninjured, likely "due to her husband's body sheltering her from a spray of bullets," said a Go Fund Me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Careful when you clean that windshield.



The killer is still on the loose?


----------



## Yoused

SuperMatt said:


> The killer is still on the loose?



Seems like it. I am not sure they have info more detailed than "a BMW", so it might never be resolved.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Georgia's Gun Laws Are Forcing Atlanta's Midtown Music Festival to Cancel This Year
					

The annual event takes place in Piedmont Park, a public space where guns are permitted and a short-term tenant of that property can’t enforce its own ban




					www.rollingstone.com
				




TL;DR

Music festival canceled because they are unable to ban guns at the event.  Freedom!!


----------



## Eric

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> Georgia's Gun Laws Are Forcing Atlanta's Midtown Music Festival to Cancel This Year
> 
> 
> The annual event takes place in Piedmont Park, a public space where guns are permitted and a short-term tenant of that property can’t enforce its own ban
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.rollingstone.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TL;DR
> 
> Music festival canceled because they are unable to ban guns at the event.  Freedom!!



Their freedom to carry guns outweighs their freedom to attend public events without risk of some loon-bag spraying them with assault weapons. Victims of their own device, fuck 'em.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

Eric said:


> Their freedom to carry guns outweighs their freedom to attend public events without risk of some loon-bag spraying them with assault weapons. Victims of their own device, fuck 'em.





Just found the lineup for the backup festival

11:45: Pledge of Allegiance

Noon: Lynyrd Skynyrd

1 PM: Kid Rock

2 PM: Ted Nugent

3 PM: David Duke Tribute speaker

4 PM: Lynyrd Skynyrd featuring Kid Rock

5 PM: Ted Nugent featuring Lynyrd Skynyrd

6 PM: Kid Rock featuring Ted Nugent

7 PM: Clint Eastwood and the Empty Chairs

8 PM: The Village People featuring Lynyrd Skynyrd, Kid Rock, and Ted Nugent

10 PM: National Anthem and 8,000 Gun Salute

10:15 PM:  ambulances arrive


----------



## Eric

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> Just found the lineup for the backup festival
> 
> 11:45: Pledge of Allegiance
> 
> Noon: Lynyrd Skynyrd
> 
> 1 PM: Kid Rock
> 
> 2 PM: Ted Nugent
> 
> 3 PM: David Duke Tribute speaker
> 
> 4 PM: Lynyrd Skynyrd featuring Kid Rock
> 
> 5 PM: Ted Nugent featuring Lynyrd Skynyrd
> 
> 6 PM: Kid Rock featuring Ted Nugent
> 
> 7 PM: Clint Eastwood and the Empty Chairs
> 
> 8 PM: The Village People featuring Lynyrd Skynyrd, Kid Rock, and Ted Nugent
> 
> 10 PM: National Anthem and 8,000 Gun Salute
> 
> 10:15 PM:  ambulances arrive



Don't forget Scott Baio (Chahi) I know he's not a musician but even that guy's gotta be a better guitar player than Ted Nugent.


----------



## SuperMatt




----------



## SuperMatt

Guns, police training, and a library?

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1555313019793641478/

I heard the story on the radio this morning…


----------



## lizkat

Meanwhile on the upside in the fight against gun violence, good news from 2022 primary races:

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1557508463445479424/​


----------



## GermanSuplex

A Greg Abbott supporter got called out for laughing as Beto was breaking down the issue with the Uvalde shooting and easy access to deadly weapons.

“It may be funny to you, motherf******, but it’s not funny to me.”


----------



## lizkat

GermanSuplex said:


> A Greg Abbott supporter got called out for laughing as Beto was breaking down the issue with the Uvalde shooting and easy access to deadly weapons.
> 
> “It may be funny to you, motherf******, but it’s not funny to me.”




I'm not a big fan of pols using bad language on the stump,  but I would love to have been there to join that crowd rising to their feet to give Beto a standing ovation for that drop.


----------



## Yoused

SuperMatt said:


> Guns, police training, and a library?



link


> Jesse Porter, a retired D.C. police officer, is charged with involuntary manslaughter in her death after sources familiar with the investigation said he drew a pistol to illustrate how quickly it could be done and fired. “*I thought I had my training gun*. Why did I do this? Is she ok?” witnesses told police that Porter asked.



Remind me again why exactly we let police have guns?


----------



## Yoused

Over 1,000 guns found in compound following Knox County shootout
					

State agents seized more than 1,000 firearms from a Knox County compound where two brothers are accused of firing at police.




					abc6onyourside.com
				




They found a hundred forty thousand rounds of ammo (though mostly for trap-shooting, according to the article). And most of the guns were not pistols.


----------



## Yoused

Woman gets into argument with dad, picks up a pistol and assault rifle, shoots him. Story does not say what the fight was about.









						Virginia Woman Accused Of Fatally Shooting Her Father During Argument
					

A Virginia woman was charged with murder after she allegedly got into an argument with her father and shot him to death, according to authorities.




					www.frontpagedetectives.com


----------



## lizkat

The Rs are still into saying that it's not guns that kill people, it's people... and they have occasionally even suggested that what's needed is not fewer guns,  but more mental health care.

So what happened today when the House voted on a measure to increase school-based mental health services?  Well it did pass, by a vote of 220 to 205.   One Republican voted for it. 

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1575605422366478336/​


----------



## Yoused

Following Supreme Court’s Lead, Judge Finds Right to Remove Serial Numbers From Guns
					

More fallout from Justice Clarence Thomas’ radical Second Amendment decision last June.




					slate.com
				




There were no serial numbers when the second amendment was written, so this judge feels that a law that makes it illegal to alter or scrape them off does not pass Constitutional muster.


----------



## lizkat

Yoused said:


> Following Supreme Court’s Lead, Judge Finds Right to Remove Serial Numbers From Guns
> 
> 
> More fallout from Justice Clarence Thomas’ radical Second Amendment decision last June.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> slate.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There were no serial numbers when the second amendment was written, so this judge feels that a law that makes it illegal to alter or scrape them off does not pass Constitutional muster.





This judge may not actually feel that way.  He's acknowledging the constraints of the Bruen ruling, but is also essentially begging for his own ruling to be appealed.

One can hope that Kavanaugh and Roberts will signal that Kavanaugh's moderating concurrence (joined by Roberts) in Justice Thomas' opinion in the Bruen case carries some weight forward whenever the high court considers appeals of some of the truly insane rulings now spinning out of state courts after the Bruen decision.

From a different Slate piece cited in the one you had mentioned:



> There is only one potential limiting principle on _Bruen_: Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s concurring opinion, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts. Kavanaugh, obviously aware of the extreme consequences that would flow from Thomas’ approach, tried to make the opinion sound more modest than it actually is. He clarified that states can still require licenses for concealed carry permits that may include “a background check, a mental health records check, and training in firearms handling.”
> 
> And he added that a “variety” of gun regulations remain permissible, though cited only exceedingly modest measures such as “laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings.”
> 
> It is difficult to reconcile Kavanaugh’s concurrence with substantial portions of Thomas’ opinion and thus hard to know how seriously to take it. Moving forward, gun control advocates’ best hope is that Kavanaugh and Roberts will not follow the strict logic of the majority.




The cited difficulty of reconciling the sense of the Kavanaugh and Thomas opinions in Bruen can over time recede if Roberts and Kavanaugh along with the three liberal justices  keep referring to the Kavanaugh assertions in Bruen.  It's a skinny hope but it exists.  And considering some of the BS decisions that have come out of Texas since Bruen (e.g. the one suggesting it's unconstitutional to forbid gun ownership just because someone has been indicted for a violent felony?!), it's quite likely that Kavanaugh and Roberts (or just one of them) might join the three liberal justices in agreeing to take up a few of those cases when (not if, but when!) they are appealed to the high court.  It only takes four votes to decide to hear a case.

Also in the Bruen case, Thomas by combination of reliance on both the conservatives' "originalism" framework _and_ the legal metaphor of "penumbra" has introduced wiggle room for a future SCOTUS to review the Bruen case itself in the course of taking up a related case, and possibly to conclude that Bruen was decided in error with respect to states' rights.


----------



## Yoused

Off-duty Santa Cruz police officer, cleaning his gun, shoots himself in the hand. After the round had finished with his hand, it continued on to lodge in a nearby man's torso. That man went to the hospital and failed to come out of it.

The story and the SCPD inappropriately use the word "accident" to describe the doings.


----------



## DT

I mean, holy fuck, I'm not a Gun Nut™ , but I understand the basics of firearm safety.

I always like the "... when it went off ..." like the gun just decided to fire itself.


----------



## GermanSuplex

One killed in another school shooting…






						Student shot at Ingraham High School in north Seattle dies at hospital, person in custody
					






					komonews.com


----------

